This article is within the scope of WikiProject Endangered languages, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Endangered languagesWikipedia:WikiProject Endangered languagesTemplate:WikiProject Endangered languagesEndangered languages articles

Africa: Angola / Namibia Low‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Angola (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Namibia.

Languages High‑importance

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages 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.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Moved from Kung-Ekoka Talk page

Untitled

is this the same as [[%21X%F3%F5_language]]? if so, we need to merge.--Sonjaaa 06:28, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

No, the two languages are separate; you may want to examine their SIL codes or the external links to Ethnologue. --Merovingian[[Image:Atombomb.gif|]]Talk 04:58, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)

Number of phonemes

I read on the reference page for UBYKH, which has 83 phonemes, that Kung-ekoka has 34 more phonemes than UBYKH (117 phonemes!). Does anyone know where I can see the complete phonemic inventory of the language? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.66.16.34 (talk • contribs)

It's actually not 117, but 141. (The number 117 refers to the number of consonants.) The problem is that sources are very limited, and my source was actually a general phonology textbook rather than a book specifically on !Kung. Many sources appear to agree, but the problem is actually finding the phoneme list. :S thefamouseccles 02:46, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

labial click

"It possesses no labial click, typical of the Southern Khoisan languages." I find this sentence ambiguous. Is Kung-ekoka like or unlike Southern Khoisan languages in not having a labial click? Pinkville 5 July 2005 15:42 (UTC)

Comments on combined Kung-Ekoka/Maligo/!O!ung article

The population is uncertain, as it's hard to tell what the Ethnologue figures mean, or if they're double counted. If anyone knows the San-speaking population of Angola, that would be a big help! kwami 09:16, 2005 September 2 (UTC)

!

Why is the word began with a "!", does it chage pronounciaion? Sotakeit 17:45, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The exclamation mark is often used to represent a click consonant, and the postalveolar click in particular. The article suggests that this click is affricated, and the name !Xũũ suggest that the ng used in the article title actually represents the nasalisation of a long vowel (as in French son). All in all, I find it a bit of a mouthful — more click practice is needed! — Gareth Hughes 17:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a clicked affricate [kx] followed by a long nasal vowel. There is also tone, not represented in the name. kwami 17:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do find it disturbing that there is no indication of the "proper" pronunciation of the language's name. The list of alternate names is good, but I think we need an IPA transcription for "!Kung". Anyone out there want to give it a shot? My best guess, from what I read around here, is [kǃˣũ:] (affricated voiceless alveolar click followed by a long nasalised high back vowel). But I'd prefer to hear it from someone who's actually familiar with it. JREL (talk) 13:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other than tone, I believe you're correct. But I don't have any sources handy, so I can't be sure. There's also the problem of dialectical variation, which hasn't been worked out very well. kwami 14:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So the <!K> does stand for an alveolar click, right? That Latin alphabet can be so confusing... it'd be great to have a native speaker confirm all this, particularly tone. There doesn't seem to be any indication around about that. JREL (talk) 08:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

words

Can some one add a few words with pronouciation in english including click consonants.We can try to find similarity with other languages kasar203.153.40.49 04:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck! There are no languages outside southern and eastern Africa that have clicks, apart from things like tsk tsk!. kwami 14:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]