Pronunciation of しゃ, し, しゅ, しぇ, and しょ


Now I understand that although all the morae mentioned in the title are
written in Hepburn as "sha shi shu she sho", they are actually palatalized and
sound quite different (the little や makes it clear). In fact since I speak
Mandarin Chinese natively, they sound _completely_ different since in Mandarin
the Hepburn "sh" and English "sh" are two distinct phonemes.

Now in my Japanese class, the TAs are native English speakers though the
instructor is from Japan. When the TAs are asked to read passages, the teacher
occasionally corrects them for pitch accent, the う vowels, and らりるれろ, but
never for the (to my ears) totally Englishified pronunciation of し. In fact しゃ
is pronounced exactly the same as the English word "shah" - it isn't even
pronounced "shyah".

I also notice some Japanese singers randomly pronounce しゃ as "shah" with no
consistency at all. Then again, song Japanese seems to be weird (を retaining
the "wo" sound, らりるれろ often using an "l" sound). My question is, are the two
sh's completely indistinguishable to Japanese ears? Even when correcting the
students the Japanese teacher picks up on tons of small mistakes
(mispronouncing the "u" as "oo", Korean people failing to pronounce the voiced
stops, wrong pitch accent) but **never** picks out the clearly wrong "sh" that
happens quite a lot.




(Warning: I do not know phonetics in general, and I do not speak Mandarin. I
am writing this answer while consulting Wikipedia. Although I am trying my
best to write an accurate answer, you should take it with a grain of salt,
especially with my use of technical terms and with statements about Mandarin.)

> My question is, are the two sh's completely indistinguishable to Japanese
> ears?

Completely? Probably no. But they are almost indistinguishable to most native
speakers of Japanese.

In both English and Japanese, there is only one phoneme realized by voiceless
[postalveolar](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postalveolar_consonant#Postalveolar_sibilants)
fricatives (the same holds for voiced postalveolar fricatives):

  * In English, this phoneme is typically realized as [palato-alveolar fricative [ʃ]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_palato-alveolar_fricative).
  * In Japanese, this phoneme is typically realized as [alveolo-palatal fricative [ɕ]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_alveolo-palatal_fricative).

(The primary difference between these two consonants is the shape of the
tongue.)

Therefore, most native speakers of English are not trained to distinguish
different postalveolar fricatives, and they pronounce the consonant of しゃ, しゅ,
しぇ, しょ as [ʃ] when they speak Japanese. This does not cause a problem for
comprehension because we (native speakers of Japanese) are also not trained to
distinguish different postalveolar fricatives. We probably notice something
different in their pronunciation and recognize it as “Japanese with English
accents,” but that’s all. Probably the same thing happens when native speakers
of Japanese speak English.

(I wrote “しゃ, しゅ, しぇ, しょ” above. What happens when a native speaker of English
pronounces し in Japanese? I cannot tell from my experience, but if he/she gets
the vowel [i] in Japanese right, probably he/she will necessarily pronounce
[ʃ] in a more palatalized way, resulting in [ɕ], even if he/she is not aware
of it.)

This situation may look strange to you if [ʃ] and [ɕ] belong to distinct
phonemes in your native tongue: how can anyone be unaware of the _obvious_
difference between [ʃ] and [ɕ]? But the notion of “similar sounds” is
surprisingly different from one language to another. For example, many native
speakers of Japanese have trouble distinguishing
[[s]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_alveolar_fricative) and
[[θ]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_dental_fricative) when we speak
English, and native speakers of English might wonder how anyone can be unaware
of the _obvious_ difference between [s] and [θ]. (I guess the same example
applies to native speakers of Mandarin.) As another example, many native
speakers of English have trouble distinguishing きょう (今日) and きよう (器用) when
they speak Japanese, and native speakers of Japanese might wonder how anyone
can be unaware of the _obvious_ difference between them.

By the way, “sh” in Mandarin is not [ʃ] (“sh” in English), either. According
to Wikipedia, it is [retroflex fricative
[ʂ]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_retroflex_fricative), and
therefore it has yet another tongue shape. If you do not notice the difference
between Mandarin [ʂ] and English [ʃ], that is probably because of the same
reason why native speakers of English and native speakers of Japanese do not
notice the difference between English [ʃ] and Japanese [ɕ].




(Warning: I do not know phonetics in general, and I do not speak Mandarin. I
am writing this answer while consulting Wikipedia. Although I am trying my
best to write an accurate answer, you should take it with a grain of salt,
especially with my use of technical terms and with statements about Mandarin.)

> My question is, are the two sh's completely indistinguishable to Japanese
> ears?

Completely? Probably no. But they are almost indistinguishable to most native
speakers of Japanese.

In both English and Japanese, there is only one phoneme realized by voiceless
[postalveolar](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postalveolar_consonant#Postalveolar_sibilants)
fricatives (the same holds for voiced postalveolar fricatives):

  * In English, this phoneme is typically realized as [palato-alveolar fricative [ʃ]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_palato-alveolar_fricative).
  * In Japanese, this phoneme is typically realized as [alveolo-palatal fricative [ɕ]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_alveolo-palatal_fricative).

(The primary difference between these two consonants is the shape of the
tongue.)

Therefore, most native speakers of English are not trained to distinguish
different postalveolar fricatives, and they pronounce the consonant of しゃ, しゅ,
しぇ, しょ as [ʃ] when they speak Japanese. This does not cause a problem for
comprehension because we (native speakers of Japanese) are also not trained to
distinguish different postalveolar fricatives. We probably notice something
different in their pronunciation and recognize it as “Japanese with English
accents,” but that’s all. Probably the same thing happens when native speakers
of Japanese speak English.

(I wrote “しゃ, しゅ, しぇ, しょ” above. What happens when a native speaker of English
pronounces し in Japanese? I cannot tell from my experience, but if he/she gets
the vowel [i] in Japanese right, probably he/she will necessarily pronounce
[ʃ] in a more palatalized way, resulting in [ɕ], even if he/she is not aware
of it.)

This situation may look strange to you if [ʃ] and [ɕ] belong to distinct
phonemes in your native tongue: how can anyone be unaware of the _obvious_
difference between [ʃ] and [ɕ]? But the notion of “similar sounds” is
surprisingly different from one language to another. For example, many native
speakers of Japanese have trouble distinguishing
[[s]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_alveolar_fricative) and
[[θ]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_dental_fricative) when we speak
English, and native speakers of English might wonder how anyone can be unaware
of the _obvious_ difference between [s] and [θ]. (I guess the same example
applies to native speakers of Mandarin.) As another example, many native
speakers of English have trouble distinguishing きょう (今日) and きよう (器用) when
they speak Japanese, and native speakers of Japanese might wonder how anyone
can be unaware of the _obvious_ difference between them.

By the way, “sh” in Mandarin is not [ʃ] (“sh” in English), either. According
to Wikipedia, it is [retroflex fricative
[ʂ]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_retroflex_fricative), and
therefore it has yet another tongue shape. If you do not notice the difference
between Mandarin [ʂ] and English [ʃ], that is probably because of the same
reason why native speakers of English and native speakers of Japanese do not
notice the difference between English [ʃ] and Japanese [ɕ].

