Are semivowels pronounced differently than vowels?What is the difference between a diphthong and a glide?What is the phonetic and phonemic destinction between a semivowel and a vowel?Difference between production of vowels, diphthongs and semi-vowelsHow are these rolled “r”s pronounced?How is Sanskrit “va” supposed to be pronounced?Lao orthography: ວ as part of consonant cluster or part of diphtong and placement of tone marksdear, ear, fear, gear, hear, near … why are bear/pear pronounced differently?What is the phonetic and phonemic destinction between a semivowel and a vowel?Wellsean Syllabification and Recapitulation Symbols in the LPDWhat is the nature of the distinction when a semivowel is surrounded by its corresponding vowel?Is wikipedia wrong when it speaks of the hebrew shwa not being pronounced ə?Why are two versions of a word written in the same IPA pronounced differently?

What is the right way to query an I2C device from an interrupt service routine?

If a creature is blocking and it has vigilance does it still tap?

Can I deep fry food in butter instead of vegetable oil?

Can the word "coexist" be used for more than two things/people/subjects/... etc?

How frequently do Russian people still refer to others by their patronymic (отчество)?

Which high-degree derivatives play an essential role?

Sleepy tired vs physically tired

Is it possible to spoof an IP address to an exact number?

Term for a character that only exists to be talked to

Performance of loop vs expansion

How can solar sailed ships be protected from space debris?

Why is quantum gravity non-renormalizable?

My mother co-signed for my car. Can she take it away from me if I am the one making car payments?

What does "another" mean in this case?

Is my background sufficient to start Quantum Computing

What do you call the motor that fuels the movement of a robotic arm?

Are there advantages in writing by hand over typing out a story?

Auto replacement of characters

How to compute the number of centroids for K-means clustering algorithm given minimal distance?

Does the North Korea Kim Jong Un have an heir?

Finding integer database columns that may have their data type changed to reduce size

My players like to search everything. What do they find?

Fine-tuning parameters for existing methods

What does "residence of temporary character" mean



Are semivowels pronounced differently than vowels?


What is the difference between a diphthong and a glide?What is the phonetic and phonemic destinction between a semivowel and a vowel?Difference between production of vowels, diphthongs and semi-vowelsHow are these rolled “r”s pronounced?How is Sanskrit “va” supposed to be pronounced?Lao orthography: ວ as part of consonant cluster or part of diphtong and placement of tone marksdear, ear, fear, gear, hear, near … why are bear/pear pronounced differently?What is the phonetic and phonemic destinction between a semivowel and a vowel?Wellsean Syllabification and Recapitulation Symbols in the LPDWhat is the nature of the distinction when a semivowel is surrounded by its corresponding vowel?Is wikipedia wrong when it speaks of the hebrew shwa not being pronounced ə?Why are two versions of a word written in the same IPA pronounced differently?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








1















A vowel is a sound generated by an open vocal tract, with vibration of the vocal cords and without friction. A consonant is every sound that is not a vowel. These two concepts are very simple and clear.



However, the whole concept of a semivowel seems to me a consequence of the false statement that the beginning sound and the final sound of a syllable (respectively, an onset and a coda) must be consonants. In several words of several languages, a diphthong (eg. "pay", "fly" and "yes" in English) or a triphthong (eg "Paraguay" and "why" in English) may begin/end a syllable. As far as I can hear, there isn't any difference in pronunciation of these vowels when are in the beginning or end of a syllable and when they are in the middle of it (nucleus). AFAIK, for instance,
[flaɪ̯] and [flaj] are pronounced identically. Therefore, why are there different IPA symbols for semivowels (eg [w] and [j]) ?










share|improve this question






















  • Relevant: What is the different between a diphthong and a glide?

    – Michaelyus
    8 hours ago












  • Related: linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/25679/…

    – Draconis
    8 hours ago

















1















A vowel is a sound generated by an open vocal tract, with vibration of the vocal cords and without friction. A consonant is every sound that is not a vowel. These two concepts are very simple and clear.



However, the whole concept of a semivowel seems to me a consequence of the false statement that the beginning sound and the final sound of a syllable (respectively, an onset and a coda) must be consonants. In several words of several languages, a diphthong (eg. "pay", "fly" and "yes" in English) or a triphthong (eg "Paraguay" and "why" in English) may begin/end a syllable. As far as I can hear, there isn't any difference in pronunciation of these vowels when are in the beginning or end of a syllable and when they are in the middle of it (nucleus). AFAIK, for instance,
[flaɪ̯] and [flaj] are pronounced identically. Therefore, why are there different IPA symbols for semivowels (eg [w] and [j]) ?










share|improve this question






















  • Relevant: What is the different between a diphthong and a glide?

    – Michaelyus
    8 hours ago












  • Related: linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/25679/…

    – Draconis
    8 hours ago













1












1








1








A vowel is a sound generated by an open vocal tract, with vibration of the vocal cords and without friction. A consonant is every sound that is not a vowel. These two concepts are very simple and clear.



However, the whole concept of a semivowel seems to me a consequence of the false statement that the beginning sound and the final sound of a syllable (respectively, an onset and a coda) must be consonants. In several words of several languages, a diphthong (eg. "pay", "fly" and "yes" in English) or a triphthong (eg "Paraguay" and "why" in English) may begin/end a syllable. As far as I can hear, there isn't any difference in pronunciation of these vowels when are in the beginning or end of a syllable and when they are in the middle of it (nucleus). AFAIK, for instance,
[flaɪ̯] and [flaj] are pronounced identically. Therefore, why are there different IPA symbols for semivowels (eg [w] and [j]) ?










share|improve this question














A vowel is a sound generated by an open vocal tract, with vibration of the vocal cords and without friction. A consonant is every sound that is not a vowel. These two concepts are very simple and clear.



However, the whole concept of a semivowel seems to me a consequence of the false statement that the beginning sound and the final sound of a syllable (respectively, an onset and a coda) must be consonants. In several words of several languages, a diphthong (eg. "pay", "fly" and "yes" in English) or a triphthong (eg "Paraguay" and "why" in English) may begin/end a syllable. As far as I can hear, there isn't any difference in pronunciation of these vowels when are in the beginning or end of a syllable and when they are in the middle of it (nucleus). AFAIK, for instance,
[flaɪ̯] and [flaj] are pronounced identically. Therefore, why are there different IPA symbols for semivowels (eg [w] and [j]) ?







pronunciation semivowels






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 8 hours ago









Alan EvangelistaAlan Evangelista

1464 bronze badges




1464 bronze badges












  • Relevant: What is the different between a diphthong and a glide?

    – Michaelyus
    8 hours ago












  • Related: linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/25679/…

    – Draconis
    8 hours ago

















  • Relevant: What is the different between a diphthong and a glide?

    – Michaelyus
    8 hours ago












  • Related: linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/25679/…

    – Draconis
    8 hours ago
















Relevant: What is the different between a diphthong and a glide?

– Michaelyus
8 hours ago






Relevant: What is the different between a diphthong and a glide?

– Michaelyus
8 hours ago














Related: linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/25679/…

– Draconis
8 hours ago





Related: linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/25679/…

– Draconis
8 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















3














There are a few different and mutually incompatible definitions of "consonant" and "vowel". One is, like you said, that vowels have no friction. But what about approximants like [l] or [ɹ]—or, for that matter, [j] or [w]? Those sounds have no friction and no complete closure, so wouldn't they be vowels?



Another definition is that vowels form syllable nuclei, while consonants don't. (More often this is called "syllabic" versus "non-syllabic" for clarity.) This notably requires defining what a "syllable" is; like phonemes, syllables aren't anything that can be quantitatively measured on a spectrogram, they're theoretical constructs that make phonological theories more elegant. And not all theories use them.



But many theories of phonology do use syllables, and in practice this syllabic/non-syllabic distinction turns out to be extremely useful for those theories. [i] and [j] in theory have exactly the same formants, it's just that the former is a syllable nucleus, and the latter isn't. Same with [u] and [w], and [y] and [ɥ], and [ɑ] and [ʕ].



As for why there are different symbols? Historical artifacts, really. The IPA vowel chart and consonant chart are completely separate and mutually exclusive, so when the same phonetic sound can be both a "consonant" and a "vowel", they had to make separate symbols for them. More recently, diacritics have caught on to switch one to the other, which is why we talk about English /n̩/ and Latin /e̯/ instead of making up entirely new symbols.



EDIT: It's worth noting that, in practice, semivowels do also tend to be a bit closer than actual vowels. This is usually considered a phonetic detail and ignored by phonologists.






share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    It might be worth noting that while "in theory" semivowels have the same formants as the corresponding vowels, in practice, in a few languages where the semivowel symbols tend to be used, there is, or there is thought to be, a narrower closure of the vowel tract in the semivowels compared to the corresponding vowels. Of course, though, you're not wrong in saying that "in theory" they are the same, since that's how the IPA defines them.

    – LjL
    7 hours ago











  • @LjL True! I'll add a note

    – Draconis
    7 hours ago











  • @LjL Could you give examples of languages in which this phonetic difference between vowel and semivowel exists? I do not hear it in English, German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and French.

    – Alan Evangelista
    6 hours ago







  • 1





    @AlanEvangelista To use one of my new favorite minimal pairs, compare English "eat" and "yeet". Your mouth opens slightly as you transition from the [j] to the [i] in the latter.

    – Draconis
    4 hours ago






  • 1





    @AlanEvangelista Ah, alas. Try "east" versus "yeast". For me at least they're quite distinct, with the [j] being closer than the [i]. "Wu" versus "ooh" is less distinct but also noticeable.

    – Draconis
    3 hours ago













Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "312"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31845%2fare-semivowels-pronounced-differently-than-vowels%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









3














There are a few different and mutually incompatible definitions of "consonant" and "vowel". One is, like you said, that vowels have no friction. But what about approximants like [l] or [ɹ]—or, for that matter, [j] or [w]? Those sounds have no friction and no complete closure, so wouldn't they be vowels?



Another definition is that vowels form syllable nuclei, while consonants don't. (More often this is called "syllabic" versus "non-syllabic" for clarity.) This notably requires defining what a "syllable" is; like phonemes, syllables aren't anything that can be quantitatively measured on a spectrogram, they're theoretical constructs that make phonological theories more elegant. And not all theories use them.



But many theories of phonology do use syllables, and in practice this syllabic/non-syllabic distinction turns out to be extremely useful for those theories. [i] and [j] in theory have exactly the same formants, it's just that the former is a syllable nucleus, and the latter isn't. Same with [u] and [w], and [y] and [ɥ], and [ɑ] and [ʕ].



As for why there are different symbols? Historical artifacts, really. The IPA vowel chart and consonant chart are completely separate and mutually exclusive, so when the same phonetic sound can be both a "consonant" and a "vowel", they had to make separate symbols for them. More recently, diacritics have caught on to switch one to the other, which is why we talk about English /n̩/ and Latin /e̯/ instead of making up entirely new symbols.



EDIT: It's worth noting that, in practice, semivowels do also tend to be a bit closer than actual vowels. This is usually considered a phonetic detail and ignored by phonologists.






share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    It might be worth noting that while "in theory" semivowels have the same formants as the corresponding vowels, in practice, in a few languages where the semivowel symbols tend to be used, there is, or there is thought to be, a narrower closure of the vowel tract in the semivowels compared to the corresponding vowels. Of course, though, you're not wrong in saying that "in theory" they are the same, since that's how the IPA defines them.

    – LjL
    7 hours ago











  • @LjL True! I'll add a note

    – Draconis
    7 hours ago











  • @LjL Could you give examples of languages in which this phonetic difference between vowel and semivowel exists? I do not hear it in English, German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and French.

    – Alan Evangelista
    6 hours ago







  • 1





    @AlanEvangelista To use one of my new favorite minimal pairs, compare English "eat" and "yeet". Your mouth opens slightly as you transition from the [j] to the [i] in the latter.

    – Draconis
    4 hours ago






  • 1





    @AlanEvangelista Ah, alas. Try "east" versus "yeast". For me at least they're quite distinct, with the [j] being closer than the [i]. "Wu" versus "ooh" is less distinct but also noticeable.

    – Draconis
    3 hours ago















3














There are a few different and mutually incompatible definitions of "consonant" and "vowel". One is, like you said, that vowels have no friction. But what about approximants like [l] or [ɹ]—or, for that matter, [j] or [w]? Those sounds have no friction and no complete closure, so wouldn't they be vowels?



Another definition is that vowels form syllable nuclei, while consonants don't. (More often this is called "syllabic" versus "non-syllabic" for clarity.) This notably requires defining what a "syllable" is; like phonemes, syllables aren't anything that can be quantitatively measured on a spectrogram, they're theoretical constructs that make phonological theories more elegant. And not all theories use them.



But many theories of phonology do use syllables, and in practice this syllabic/non-syllabic distinction turns out to be extremely useful for those theories. [i] and [j] in theory have exactly the same formants, it's just that the former is a syllable nucleus, and the latter isn't. Same with [u] and [w], and [y] and [ɥ], and [ɑ] and [ʕ].



As for why there are different symbols? Historical artifacts, really. The IPA vowel chart and consonant chart are completely separate and mutually exclusive, so when the same phonetic sound can be both a "consonant" and a "vowel", they had to make separate symbols for them. More recently, diacritics have caught on to switch one to the other, which is why we talk about English /n̩/ and Latin /e̯/ instead of making up entirely new symbols.



EDIT: It's worth noting that, in practice, semivowels do also tend to be a bit closer than actual vowels. This is usually considered a phonetic detail and ignored by phonologists.






share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    It might be worth noting that while "in theory" semivowels have the same formants as the corresponding vowels, in practice, in a few languages where the semivowel symbols tend to be used, there is, or there is thought to be, a narrower closure of the vowel tract in the semivowels compared to the corresponding vowels. Of course, though, you're not wrong in saying that "in theory" they are the same, since that's how the IPA defines them.

    – LjL
    7 hours ago











  • @LjL True! I'll add a note

    – Draconis
    7 hours ago











  • @LjL Could you give examples of languages in which this phonetic difference between vowel and semivowel exists? I do not hear it in English, German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and French.

    – Alan Evangelista
    6 hours ago







  • 1





    @AlanEvangelista To use one of my new favorite minimal pairs, compare English "eat" and "yeet". Your mouth opens slightly as you transition from the [j] to the [i] in the latter.

    – Draconis
    4 hours ago






  • 1





    @AlanEvangelista Ah, alas. Try "east" versus "yeast". For me at least they're quite distinct, with the [j] being closer than the [i]. "Wu" versus "ooh" is less distinct but also noticeable.

    – Draconis
    3 hours ago













3












3








3







There are a few different and mutually incompatible definitions of "consonant" and "vowel". One is, like you said, that vowels have no friction. But what about approximants like [l] or [ɹ]—or, for that matter, [j] or [w]? Those sounds have no friction and no complete closure, so wouldn't they be vowels?



Another definition is that vowels form syllable nuclei, while consonants don't. (More often this is called "syllabic" versus "non-syllabic" for clarity.) This notably requires defining what a "syllable" is; like phonemes, syllables aren't anything that can be quantitatively measured on a spectrogram, they're theoretical constructs that make phonological theories more elegant. And not all theories use them.



But many theories of phonology do use syllables, and in practice this syllabic/non-syllabic distinction turns out to be extremely useful for those theories. [i] and [j] in theory have exactly the same formants, it's just that the former is a syllable nucleus, and the latter isn't. Same with [u] and [w], and [y] and [ɥ], and [ɑ] and [ʕ].



As for why there are different symbols? Historical artifacts, really. The IPA vowel chart and consonant chart are completely separate and mutually exclusive, so when the same phonetic sound can be both a "consonant" and a "vowel", they had to make separate symbols for them. More recently, diacritics have caught on to switch one to the other, which is why we talk about English /n̩/ and Latin /e̯/ instead of making up entirely new symbols.



EDIT: It's worth noting that, in practice, semivowels do also tend to be a bit closer than actual vowels. This is usually considered a phonetic detail and ignored by phonologists.






share|improve this answer















There are a few different and mutually incompatible definitions of "consonant" and "vowel". One is, like you said, that vowels have no friction. But what about approximants like [l] or [ɹ]—or, for that matter, [j] or [w]? Those sounds have no friction and no complete closure, so wouldn't they be vowels?



Another definition is that vowels form syllable nuclei, while consonants don't. (More often this is called "syllabic" versus "non-syllabic" for clarity.) This notably requires defining what a "syllable" is; like phonemes, syllables aren't anything that can be quantitatively measured on a spectrogram, they're theoretical constructs that make phonological theories more elegant. And not all theories use them.



But many theories of phonology do use syllables, and in practice this syllabic/non-syllabic distinction turns out to be extremely useful for those theories. [i] and [j] in theory have exactly the same formants, it's just that the former is a syllable nucleus, and the latter isn't. Same with [u] and [w], and [y] and [ɥ], and [ɑ] and [ʕ].



As for why there are different symbols? Historical artifacts, really. The IPA vowel chart and consonant chart are completely separate and mutually exclusive, so when the same phonetic sound can be both a "consonant" and a "vowel", they had to make separate symbols for them. More recently, diacritics have caught on to switch one to the other, which is why we talk about English /n̩/ and Latin /e̯/ instead of making up entirely new symbols.



EDIT: It's worth noting that, in practice, semivowels do also tend to be a bit closer than actual vowels. This is usually considered a phonetic detail and ignored by phonologists.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 7 hours ago

























answered 8 hours ago









DraconisDraconis

16.5k1 gold badge24 silver badges67 bronze badges




16.5k1 gold badge24 silver badges67 bronze badges







  • 1





    It might be worth noting that while "in theory" semivowels have the same formants as the corresponding vowels, in practice, in a few languages where the semivowel symbols tend to be used, there is, or there is thought to be, a narrower closure of the vowel tract in the semivowels compared to the corresponding vowels. Of course, though, you're not wrong in saying that "in theory" they are the same, since that's how the IPA defines them.

    – LjL
    7 hours ago











  • @LjL True! I'll add a note

    – Draconis
    7 hours ago











  • @LjL Could you give examples of languages in which this phonetic difference between vowel and semivowel exists? I do not hear it in English, German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and French.

    – Alan Evangelista
    6 hours ago







  • 1





    @AlanEvangelista To use one of my new favorite minimal pairs, compare English "eat" and "yeet". Your mouth opens slightly as you transition from the [j] to the [i] in the latter.

    – Draconis
    4 hours ago






  • 1





    @AlanEvangelista Ah, alas. Try "east" versus "yeast". For me at least they're quite distinct, with the [j] being closer than the [i]. "Wu" versus "ooh" is less distinct but also noticeable.

    – Draconis
    3 hours ago












  • 1





    It might be worth noting that while "in theory" semivowels have the same formants as the corresponding vowels, in practice, in a few languages where the semivowel symbols tend to be used, there is, or there is thought to be, a narrower closure of the vowel tract in the semivowels compared to the corresponding vowels. Of course, though, you're not wrong in saying that "in theory" they are the same, since that's how the IPA defines them.

    – LjL
    7 hours ago











  • @LjL True! I'll add a note

    – Draconis
    7 hours ago











  • @LjL Could you give examples of languages in which this phonetic difference between vowel and semivowel exists? I do not hear it in English, German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and French.

    – Alan Evangelista
    6 hours ago







  • 1





    @AlanEvangelista To use one of my new favorite minimal pairs, compare English "eat" and "yeet". Your mouth opens slightly as you transition from the [j] to the [i] in the latter.

    – Draconis
    4 hours ago






  • 1





    @AlanEvangelista Ah, alas. Try "east" versus "yeast". For me at least they're quite distinct, with the [j] being closer than the [i]. "Wu" versus "ooh" is less distinct but also noticeable.

    – Draconis
    3 hours ago







1




1





It might be worth noting that while "in theory" semivowels have the same formants as the corresponding vowels, in practice, in a few languages where the semivowel symbols tend to be used, there is, or there is thought to be, a narrower closure of the vowel tract in the semivowels compared to the corresponding vowels. Of course, though, you're not wrong in saying that "in theory" they are the same, since that's how the IPA defines them.

– LjL
7 hours ago





It might be worth noting that while "in theory" semivowels have the same formants as the corresponding vowels, in practice, in a few languages where the semivowel symbols tend to be used, there is, or there is thought to be, a narrower closure of the vowel tract in the semivowels compared to the corresponding vowels. Of course, though, you're not wrong in saying that "in theory" they are the same, since that's how the IPA defines them.

– LjL
7 hours ago













@LjL True! I'll add a note

– Draconis
7 hours ago





@LjL True! I'll add a note

– Draconis
7 hours ago













@LjL Could you give examples of languages in which this phonetic difference between vowel and semivowel exists? I do not hear it in English, German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and French.

– Alan Evangelista
6 hours ago






@LjL Could you give examples of languages in which this phonetic difference between vowel and semivowel exists? I do not hear it in English, German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and French.

– Alan Evangelista
6 hours ago





1




1





@AlanEvangelista To use one of my new favorite minimal pairs, compare English "eat" and "yeet". Your mouth opens slightly as you transition from the [j] to the [i] in the latter.

– Draconis
4 hours ago





@AlanEvangelista To use one of my new favorite minimal pairs, compare English "eat" and "yeet". Your mouth opens slightly as you transition from the [j] to the [i] in the latter.

– Draconis
4 hours ago




1




1





@AlanEvangelista Ah, alas. Try "east" versus "yeast". For me at least they're quite distinct, with the [j] being closer than the [i]. "Wu" versus "ooh" is less distinct but also noticeable.

– Draconis
3 hours ago





@AlanEvangelista Ah, alas. Try "east" versus "yeast". For me at least they're quite distinct, with the [j] being closer than the [i]. "Wu" versus "ooh" is less distinct but also noticeable.

– Draconis
3 hours ago

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Linguistics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flinguistics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f31845%2fare-semivowels-pronounced-differently-than-vowels%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

Ласкавець круглолистий Зміст Опис | Поширення | Галерея | Примітки | Посилання | Навігаційне меню58171138361-22960890446Bupleurum rotundifoliumEuro+Med PlantbasePlants of the World Online — Kew ScienceGermplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN)Ласкавецькн. VI : Літери Ком — Левиправивши або дописавши її