Talk:Homorganic consonant

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Phonetics Task Force.

Japanese

The Western transliterations of the Japanese language have been historically based on some version or modification of a system known as Hepburn romanization. A number of subtle problems in that 19th century system have never been fully resolved. This has caused discussion threads to develop in more than one Wikipedia context, e.g.,

The perceived transliteration dispute arises because of the homorganic consonants in words, place names, or personal names -- as in "Tamba" and "Temmu."

This transliteration or romanization dispute is not unimportant because it recurs in a number of consequential Wikipedia articles, e.g., Emperor Kimmei, Emperor Jimmu, Emperor Mommu, Empress Gemmei, Emperor Kammu, etc.

In an attempt to mitigate these sorts of disputes, an explanatory note has been added to each of the above-referenced articles. It is my hope that these spelling anomalies may be somewhat clarified by referring to this technical term -- Homorganic consonants. In any event, I hope the addition of this one technical term will help ameliorate some of the barriers which affect moving towards consensus.

In my view, the central feature of dispute arises from a conflation of the sound of gemination with the sound of homorganic consonants ... and the romanization which represents double consonants for both phonetically distinct sounds. Is this a fair way of summarizing the issues?

Could it be that the ear hears what the eye reads; or conversely, the more discriminating ear understands a disjunction between what is recognized aurally and what is represented in Western transliterations -- See Hepburn romanization#Variants of Hepburn romanization, n.b. sub-sections "Syllabic n" and "Double consonants"? --Tenmei (talk) 18:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Consonant length

What does consonant length have to do with homorganic consonants? That section doesn't show that it has anything to do with the lemma. Can we simply delete it? ◅ Sebastian 13:46, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Homorganic nasal rule

@Enkyo2 Is the definition of homorganic nasal rule gramatically correct ? It seems bit confusing to me. Providing a citation would be appreciated Inquisitive creature (talk) 18:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Separate Page

Should there be a separate page fully fleshing out heterorganic consonants? Kaden Bayne Vanciel (talk) 18:28, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]