Indeed, "õ" in the first three words seem to be a bit more relaxed while in the other two it is more intense and thus is generated farther back in the mouth. I bet that if all those words would have been said by the same person and inside a longer text, they would have sounded more similar.LMNY wrote:To my ears, the õ of the first three words is slightly more relaxed and open than the õõ of the last two words.
I think it depends on both: the context and the speaker (how intensely or lazily he or she pronounces "õ"). But until today, all "õ"-s have sounded the same to me.Naava wrote:I read from Wikipedia that õ can be "mid back, close back, or mid central". Does this happen in certain contexts or is it just up to the speaker which one they'll use?
I know that Võro language has two different "õ"-s: madal "õ" (or eestipärane "õ") and kõrge "õ" (which, I guess, is similar to Russian Ы; but I don't think I have heard it myself yet).Naava wrote:Is there any dialectal variation? I know that some dialects lack õ, but for example my teacher's õ sounds like Russian Ы to me. Is there a dialect with Ы-like õ or is that one possible (standard) pronunciation, too?
In case of non-verbs, I think it should have the same meaning as Finnish -kin, it's pretty much the same as "ka(a)" or "samuti" (too, also), but more precise, because you can target specific words. But there is no equivalent to Finnish "-kaan/kään"; "-gi/ki" is used in both positive and negative contexts.Naava wrote:I'd also like to ask about -gi. If anyone happens to speak Finnish / know the answer, is it used like Finnish -kin? For example
minäkin lähden - I'll go, too
minä lähdenkin - I changed my mind, I'll go / but I go to X (and you don't)
In case of verbs, I am not so sure -- especially after reading your example. I would translate "ma lähengi" as "I do go". I usually use it to emphasize the action, to state the obvious or something that I knew would happen or something that I planned to do anyway.