Hello, Good morning

“ɧ” means “a linguist somewhere gave up while studying Swedish”

'why [ɧ] is not real'

It sounds like xʷ to me

stole my video. no, i didn't finish the script yet, but you must have come back from the future and stolen it.

FINALLY SOMEONE SAID IT

This has annoyed me for over a decade, and since I now live in Eastern Norway and hear Swedish all the time, I literally think of this every time I hear /xʷ/.

Proposition: We just force the Swedish to pronouns sk and sj as /sk/ and /sj/

That letter looks like it would kill me while I sleep.

Santa Claus is more real than [ɧ]

Nice argument. One small issue: around half of my conlangs spoken in my conworld have that sound, so, no, transcribing Swedish is not that symbol's only function anymore ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

As a native Swedish speakers and linguist I whole heartedly agree. It's only [x] or [xʷ] in most dialects outside of Norrland and Finland. Including my own dialect (Stockholm)

I just gotta say you did the tongue twister so well!

i randomly got recomended this, and clicked on it thinking it was going to be an exciting physics video about plancks constant, i was dissapointed

Unexpectedly low views and whatnot, this is a very solid video!

This is a great video, thanks! It does seem like the IPA should take a look at this one.

I saw the name of this video and wasn't sure if it was linguistics or quantum mechanics.

Interestingly, most Swedish sources that I have seen (e.g. Swedish Wikipedia or "Sje-ljudet är det svenskaste ljudet" by Språket) seem to say that [ɧ] represents the "dark" (mörka) or "back" (bakre) sj-sound, whereas the "light" (ljusa) or "front" (främre) sj-sound is written as [ʂ]. In phonemic transcription I usually see the phoneme written as /ɧ/, even though the phoneme can be realised as [ʂ], but picking one realisation as the symbol for a phoneme is pretty normal (I think). Now, I'm not quite sure if the "dark/back sj-sound" actually refers to one single realisation or if it encompasses several similar realisations, but I don't think it encompasses [ʂ] or [ɕ], as those would be a "light/front" realisation of the phoneme /ɧ/. (Although [ɕ] is usually the tj-sound, which is a different phoneme.) In any case, most if not all realisations of /ɧ/ can be written using other IPA symbols, so it is a bit weird that this is kept as an IPA symbol.

this is nice you should do more linguistics vids

I think one thing you missed is how the different allophones of the sounds are used in different dialects. There's too main types of allophones: back (something like [xʷ]) and front (something like [ʂ]). In most dialects (I think anyway), the back version is used syllable-initially and the front version uses elsewhere. In some other dialects, mainly southern ones, only the back version is used, while in some of the eastern dialects only the front version is used. I think this is the root of the problem of using either of these symbols to represent the phoneme. And yeah, it's not the case that /ɧ/ is [ʃ] and [x] simultaneously, but rather something like those sounds in complementary distrubution.