Do words differing only in the voicedness of consonants act as functionally homophonous?


In Japanese, there are some sound differences that clearly distinguish words
from one another, such as falling on a different 行 or 段 on the 五十音 ([傘]{かさ}
vs. [風]{かぜ} or [友]{とも} vs その); while other sound differences make no
difference as all (English 'l' vs. English 'r', vanishing `<u>` sounds, ヱビス
vs. エビス).

Where on this spectrum does voicedness (e.g. さ vs. ざ) fall?

(I am aware that words are spelled one way or the other, but then you get
situations like [出島]{でじま} vs. [広島]{ひろしま} where the 島 is _clearly_ the same
word, or the somewhat more extreme [仲田]{なかた} vs [仲田]{なかだ}.)




No, Japanese is full of voiced-unvoiced minimal pairs. There are minimal pairs
even when the constituent morphemes are the same:

  * 山川（やまかわ） mountains and rivers (dvandva compound)
  * 山川（やまがわ） mountain rivers (modifier-head compound)

Dvandva compounds typically don't trigger rendaku, so the former is unvoiced.
You can find plenty of other minimal pairs showing contrasts in voicedness,
for example:

  * 蚊（か） mosquito
  * 蛾（が） moth

And so on. The important point is that native speakers hear these as clearly
contrasting words, so it's a fundamental distinction in Japanese phonology.
They are not homophonous in any sense.




No, Japanese is full of voiced-unvoiced minimal pairs. There are minimal pairs
even when the constituent morphemes are the same:

  * 山川（やまかわ） mountains and rivers (dvandva compound)
  * 山川（やまがわ） mountain rivers (modifier-head compound)

Dvandva compounds typically don't trigger rendaku, so the former is unvoiced.
You can find plenty of other minimal pairs showing contrasts in voicedness,
for example:

  * 蚊（か） mosquito
  * 蛾（が） moth

And so on. The important point is that native speakers hear these as clearly
contrasting words, so it's a fundamental distinction in Japanese phonology.
They are not homophonous in any sense.

