Cannabis Ruderalis

thcscience_admin
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Tyuia (talk | contribs)
137 edits
Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)
Bots, Template editors
2,177,824 edits
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Help talk:IPA/English/Archive 27) (bot
Line 1: Line 1:
{{For|requests for transcription|Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language}}
{{oldmfd|date=March 1 2008|result=Keep|votepage=Help:Pronunciation}}
{{Talk header|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=3|units=months}}
{{archivebox|
{{Round in circles|search=no}}
#[[Help talk:Pronunciation/Archive 1|October 2007 to March 2008]]
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}}
#[[Help talk:Pronunciation/Archive 2|April 2008]]
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes|
#[[/Archive 3|April to December 2008]]
{{WikiProject Help|importance=high}}
#[[/Archive 4|January to February 2009]]
{{WP Languages|importance=mid}}
#[[/Archive 5|March to May 2009]]
{{WikiProject Linguistics|phonetics=yes}}
}}
{{reader-facing page}}
{{oldmfd|date=1 March 2008|result=Keep|votepage=Help:Pronunciation}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 27
|minthreadsleft = 4
|algo = old(92d)
|archive = Help talk:IPA/English/Archive %(counter)d
}}{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=/Archive index
|mask=/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=yes
}}
}}


== Double entry ==
== Australian ''bad'' and ''lad'' ==

What's the difference between the vowels in ''bad'' and ''lad'' in Australian English? Thanks in advance [[User:Ferike333|Ferike333]] ([[User talk:Ferike333|talk]]) 18:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

:Length, perhaps a bit like the diff tween the two ''can's'' in "I can can that for you" in US English. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 18:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
::Both cans have same basic vowel. The first one is unstressed, so its vowel is reduced to schwa.--[[User:Confused monk|Confused monk]] ([[User talk:Confused monk|talk]]) 17:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
:::The two cans in that sentence have completely different vowels. It's not length.
::Sounds interesting. Didnt know about both. Thanks [[User:Ferike333|Ferike333]] ([[User talk:Ferike333|talk]]) 16:54, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
I think kwami might be referring to the difference between between "cans" in "I can open the can", but in American dialects I think they pronounce these in the same way. Anyhow, the difference between "lad" and "bad" in Australian English is just length. The "a" in "abd is twice as long. I think it is in some UK dialects as well. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Gregcaletta|Gregcaletta]] ([[User talk:Gregcaletta|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Gregcaletta|contribs]]) 09:01, 3 August 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Questions ==

The table says that the second U in the word "curriculum" is written in IPA as /ʊ/ or /ʉ/, but shouldn't it be /juː/? Also, aren't /ər/ and /ɜr/ the same, as is /ɒr/ and /ɔr/? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.13.25.115|71.13.25.115]] ([[User talk:71.13.25.115|talk]]) 22:52, 13 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:I can't remember ever hearing anyone pronounce "curriculum" with a full /ju:/. The difference between /ɜr/ and /ər/ is the same as between /ʌ/ and /ə/: the latter are reduced vowels. /ɒr/ and /ɔr/ are the same for most Americans, but not in the UK. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 01:18, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
::curriculum is /kərɪkjələm/ or something. not exactly sure but it definitely has a /j/. east coast US speaking. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/18.241.6.19|18.241.6.19]] ([[User talk:18.241.6.19|talk]]) 23:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::So in North America, it's generally pronounced like /kərɪkjələm/, so I guess using /ʉ/ or /ʊ/ to spell it is... UK pronunciation? I know that it's stated at the beginning of the article that the table covers not just American English but also UK pronunciantion, but it should make a distinction in how words are written in IPA for the different dialects, just so people don't get confused as to how to write/read it in IPA based on their dialect, especially if they're just learning the IPA. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.13.25.115|71.13.25.115]] ([[User talk:71.13.25.115|talk]]) 04:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

::::Read the footnote: "Pronounced [ʊ] in many dialects, [ə] in others. Many speakers freely alternate between a reduced [ʊ̈] and a reduced [ə]." [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 08:37, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

:::::Please stop adding your invented symbols. ɵ and ʉ are IPA symbols for different vowels not used in english.--[[User:Confused monk|Confused monk]] ([[User talk:Confused monk|talk]]) 13:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

::::::Actually they are used in English, but you're missing the point: This is a key to the transcriptions used in the articles. If the symbols are used in the articles, then we need to cover them here. If you come up with alternates that we can agree on, and then go on to substitute them in the thousands of IPA-en and pron-en articles, then we can eliminate these. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 18:32, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

:::::::Well, it's you who invented this symbol, it's you who changed the transcriptions, it's you who keeps reverting when someone corrects them. (as in [[bonobo]]) I think it's you who is missing the point. --[[User:Confused monk|Confused monk]] ([[User talk:Confused monk|talk]]) 13:36, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

::::::::You can look up the edit history of the article with the 'history' tab, which should dispel your suspicions. But I'm glad you brought 'bonobo' to my attention: though the single edit I had made last week was in error, and you were right in correcting it, the article was missing the other and AFAIK more common pronunciation. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 14:19, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

:::::::Agreed with /<s>ʊ</s>/ which is used by the OED, but I think the use of /ɵ/ for that was made up by a Wikipedian... Have you ever seen it used anywhere else? Everyone uses /ə(ʊ)/ for that (but that only make sense if we transcribe the vowel in ''code'' as /əʊ/). One (quite old) dictionary using /ou/ for the vowel in ''code'' and italics for optional phonemes uses /o''u''/ for ''kilogram'' (despite not using /o/ for anything else), so we could write /o(ʊ)/ by analogy. If we really have to make up symbols, /a/ for <small>BATH</small> (staff, clasp, dance: kinda free alternation between /ɑː/ and /æ/) and /ɔ/ for <small>CLOTH</small> (cough, long, gone: kinda free alternation between /ɔː/ and /ɒ/) would be more useful. (And, BTW, why we have /i/ for <small>HAPPY</small> but not /u/ for <small>INTO</small> (influence, situation, bivouac)? --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 20:07, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

::::::::I have seen /ɵ/, but for the life of me I can't remember where. /o(ʊ)/ isn't bad, though it doesn't capture the /ə/ alternate. As for /u/ for ''into,'' I don't control that distinction (and neither does the OED), so I can't say. (I think moreover that I would support a move to change /i/ in ''city'' to traditional /ɪ/, which is generally clearer to the reader, since /i/ is mistakenly used in a number of articles for both /iː/ and /ɪ/. Would /ʊ/ work similarly for your /u/?) [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 20:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

:::::::::Webster's describes reduced /oʊ/ as a rounded schwa for some speakers, though they don't transcribe it as such, instead transcribing both /oʊ/ and plain schwa. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 14:40, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

::::::::::That proves you're wrong.--[[User:Confused monk|Confused monk]] ([[User talk:Confused monk|talk]]) 16:56, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
← After all, /i/ and /ɪ/ are in complementary distribution, as the former is only found at the end of syllables and the latter never is; but /i/ is handy for avoid having to mark syllables in /njuːkliər/ ''nuclear'' vs /njuːklɪər/ ''new clear''. If we used /ɪ/ we should write /njuː.klɪ.ər/ to make clear that it's three syllables (and that it doesn't become /nuːklɪr/ in dialects with the mirror-nearer merger). OTOH, most dictionaries for RP use /ɪ/. Maybe we could allow both? For example,
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
|-
|<big>{{IPA|ɪ}}</big>
| align=left|b'''i'''d, p'''i'''t, happ'''y'''<ref name=i>Also transcribed /i/ at the end of syllables (e.g. /njuːkliər/ is equivalent to /njuː.klɪ.ər/), where in articles with the [[happy tensing]] it is pronounced more like /iː/</ref>
|} <references/> (ditto for /ʊ/ vs. /u/, but I think that the cases where using the former can cause ambiguities are much rarer). --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 21:44, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

:Ah, yes, I'd forgotten about the syllabicity issue. That wouldn't be a problem if we transcribed vowels phonemically even before /r/, so ''clear'' were "/kli:r/", but as it is that's a good argument for keeping "i". IMO it wouldn't make much sense to transcribe it differently at the ends of words than elsewhere. However, there are a lot of articles that use "ɪ" for ''city,'' and I haven't bothered to change all of them, so we should at least have a note under /ɪ/. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 07:42, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

::On the other hand using /iːr/ would require marking syllables in words such as ''keyring''. It also makes little sense in either non-rhotic dialects (to distinguish ''neared'' from ''need'' you would need a more complex rule than just {{xt|Ignore any /r/ which is not followed by a vowel}}), or dialects with the mirror-nearer merger (where they're not distinguished at all). Given that the dialects we've decided to cater with include RP and GenAm and exclude Scottish English and the like, I see little point in using /iːr/. Just use /ɪər/ and let Englishmen drop the r and Americans drop the ə. As for ''happy'', how's [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:IPA_for_English&diff=298319987&oldid=298206234 this]? --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 10:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

:::Good, though I'd take out the "sometimes". It's a good 95% of the time, as that was the convention we'd agreed on. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 10:27, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

::::Changed "sometimes" to "often"; remove it altoghether when the 95% becomes 99.5%. --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 10:33, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

:::::We had an earlier round of complaints that <{{IPA|ɨ}}> is never used for English and therefore should be abolished, and I just came across a couple of elementary textbooks that use it. One is ''Linguistics'' by Akmajian et al., p 82. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 14:59, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

::::::You still don't get it.--[[User:Confused monk|Confused monk]] ([[User talk:Confused monk|talk]]) 17:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

BTW, what happens to plurals, past tenses, etc. of words ending with /i/? <small>(I'm not a native speaker.)</small> If the happy tensing is ''really'' just allophonic, I would expect ''Tony's'' to be pronounced with a laxer vowel than ''Tony''. If this is not the case, then the happy tensing might have become phonemic, as ''Rosie's'' and ''roses'' might contrast as /rəʊziz/ ~ /rəʊzɪz/, and ''studied'' ~ ''studded'' would be /stʌdid/ ~ /stʌdɪd/. Is there any dialect with a three-way distinction between ''Rosie's'', ''roses'', and ''Rosa's''? --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 12:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)</small>
:They have the same quality as their unadorned singulars/present tenses etc. For example, [[John Bunyan]] rhymes "stories" {{IPA|[ˈstɔːrɪz]}} with "more is" {{IPA|[ˈmɔːrɪz]}} in [[s:The Pilgrim's Progress/Part II/Section 4#.5BMr. Valiant-for-truth.5D|"To Be a Pilgrim"]]. The rhyme no longer works for those of us who say {{IPA|[ˈstɔːriz]}}. +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 13:35, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
::That was my point (text was struck by mistake). If there are people for whom "the rhyme no longer works", that's a point against using /ɪ/ in words such as ''happy''. Does anyone know how widespread this, er..., ''studied''–''studded'' split is? --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 15:27, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
:::I think any dialect with happy-tensing applies it also to inflected forms of affected words; to the best of my knowledge, any dialect that has a tense vowel in "Rosie" and "study" will have a tense vowel in "Rosie's" and "studied". As for a three-way contrast between "Rosie's", "roses", and "Rosa's", I believe it's made both by more progressive [[English English]] accents (the more conservative ones merging "Rosie's" and "roses") and by more conservative American English accents (the more progressive ones merging "roses" and "Rosa's"). +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 15:58, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
::::Although I'm neither British nor conservative, I distinguish between Rosie's, roses, and rosa's. — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 18:37, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::LOL. Your accent may be conservative even if your politics aren't. +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 18:40, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
::::::Do you mean "conservative" tautologically (that is, specific to this particular feature) or do you mean accents that are generally conservative? I've always considered [[California English]] with its cot-caught merger, pin-pen near-merger, merry-marry-Mary merger, raised front vowels before {{IPA|/ŋ/}}, fronted {{IPA|/ʌ/}}, and lowered {{IPA|/ɪ/}} to be fairly "progressive". — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 20:12, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Of course I mean conservative with respect to the [[weak vowel merger]]. Are there any accents that are ''in general'' either conservative or progressive? California English is progressive in the ways you mentioned, but conservative in the ways most North American accents are conservative: rhotic, flat-BATH, non-H-dropping, etc. +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 21:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
::::::::Sorry, I should've been clearer. I meant amongst American dialects. — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 21:34, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Per the objection to <ɵ> above, I just found the source: Bolinger 1989. He's widely cited for this distinction, but his citers have sub'd symbols like <ŏ> for his "labial-colored" reduced vowel. But he himself uses <ɵ>. This might be the source of the distinction that was already on Wikipedia when I got here. Bolinger contrasts (p 360) ''a mission'' with [ə], ''emission'' with [ɨ], and ''omission'' with [ɵ]. The OED transcribes ''omission'' with [oʊ], while Webster's gives [oʊ] and [ə] as alternates. (They warn in their preface that they don't transcribe reduced o / rounded schwa with a distinct symbol.) [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 21:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
:/ə(ʊ)/ would be quite equivalent to what Webster's does, if we used /əʊ/ for ''boat''... --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 19:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

=== ''happy'' vowel proposal ===
Hey, this is interesting. Bolinger argues that the reduced vowel at the ends of words with happy tensing is just the final or pre-vocalic allophone of schwi. That is, ''happy'' is {{IPA|/ˈhæpɨ/}}. I was wondering if we needed to retain that distinction. Would following Bolinger be acceptable here? There are a couple advantages I can think of: (1) avoiding predictable allophones and extra symbols for our readers to memorize, and (2) avoiding the Latin vowel letters ''a e i o u.'' The reason the latter is important is that there are hundreds of articles where "i" is used ambiguously for either {{IPA|/ɪ/}} or {{IPA|/iː/}}, and whenever an editor sees it, s/he knows it needs correction. As long as we continue to use "i" for the ''happy'' vowel, our readers will never be sure if we actually mean it, or if it's simply a sloppy transcription. Also, if we overtly transcribe all final ''ee'''s as either {{IPA|/ɨ/}} or {{IPA|/iː/}}, it will be readily apparent when there is an error, and it will be quickly corrected. I have no confidence that many of the final i's in our transcriptions are truly the happy vowel.

On the other hand, I don't know how we'd handle the ''studied - studded'' distinction. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 23:14, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

:If we used {{IPA|ɨ}} for ''happy'', wouldn't that imply that people who pronounce ''roses'' and ''rosa's'' identically pronounce ''happy'' as {{IPA|[ˈhæpə]}}? — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 02:09, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

::No, different context. I merge {{IPA|/ɒ/}} and {{IPA|/ɔː/}} with {{IPA|/ɑː/}} in most contexts, leaving {{IPA|/oʊ/}} distinct (cot = caught vs coat), but before {{IPA|/r/}} I merge them with {{IPA|/oʊ/}}, leaving {{IPA|/ɑː/}} distinct (corrigible = core vs car). So, assuming ''happy'' is {{IPA|/ɨ/}}, then I merge it with {{IPA|/iː/}} finally and before vowels, but with {{IPA|/ə/}} before consonants. But there is the ''studied - studded'' problem—I don't know how Bolinger would answer that. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 04:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
:::According to the table, we're using {{IPA|/ɨ/}} equivalently with {{IPA|/<s>ɪ</s>/}}, with a link to the OED according to which "<s>ɪ</s> represents free variation between /ɪ/ and /ə/". The vowel in ''happy'' definitely isn't a schwa in any "standard" dialect of English. So we would need to either 1) distinguish between {{IPA|/ɨ/}} and {{IPA|/<s>ɪ</s>/}}, or 2) declare that we aren't using {{IPA|/<s>ɪ</s>/}} the same way the OED does. I don't think that would be worth the trouble. (Also the "different context" argument would mean that ''studied'' might be pronounced with a schwa.) --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 17:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
:::BTW, can anyone think of a possible minimal pair between /i/ and /iː/? <small>(The closest I can think of is ''seedy'' ~ ''CD'', but they are distinguished by the syllable the /d/ belongs to and by the stress of the second syllable, so that'd be /ˈsiːd.i/ ~ /'siːˌdiː/.)</small> If there are none, or if they are not distinguished by speakers with the happy tensing, the footnote for /i/ could be simplified to {{xt|Pronounced /iː/ in accents with the [[happy tensing]] and /ɪ/ in other accents.}} --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 17:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

::::Yeah, it's probably not worth the effort, as you say. Forget I said anything.

::::If I'm reading you correctly, we can simplify the footnote that way regardless. But IMO it's worth noting that even the OED has shifted.

::::Min pairs: ''manatee : humanity. bootie : booty. Andy's : Andes. chicory : chickaree.'' I have happy tensing, so the last three pairs are homonyms for me, but even for me ''manatee : humanity'' contrast. (OED has final stress for ''manatee'' and ''chickaree,'' though, which of course is often the historical source of such distinctions.) [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 17:56, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::I meant the first sentence of the footnote, the note about OED shifting is fine. (Just curious, how do you distinguish ''humanity'' from ''manatee''?) --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 19:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

::::::{{IPA|[ȷ̊uˈmænɪ̈ɾi]}} and {{IPA|[ˈmænɪ̈ti]}} (with a touch of aspiration on the [t]). I believe t/d flapping only occurs before reduced vowels.

::::::Is it /ɪ/ in other dialects, or /ɨ/ (/<s>ɪ</s>/), which is usually transcribed /ɪ/? [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 21:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::::That's what I suspected; I think that can be analyzed phonologically by having flapped /t/ at the end of syllables and voiceless/aspirated /t/ at their start (/hjuː.mæn.<s>ɪ</s>t.i/, /mæn.ə.ti/), by analogy with "eat all" [iɾɔːɫ] ~ "he talks" [hiːtʰɔks]. As for the second point, I don't think there's a three-way /ɪ/~/ɨ/~/ə/ distinction anywhere: AFAICT, /ɪ/ has a central allophone [ɨ̞] (or something like that) in unstressed syllables; /<s>ɪ</s>/ is used in places where /ɪ/ is used by some speakers and /ə/ by others. (I guess this means that there are accents in which some but not all unstressed /ɪ/ are pronounced as schwas, otherwise everybody would just use /ɪ/ everywhere — as older British dictionaries do — understanding that unstressed ones would be fully reduced in those dialects.) Do not take anything I write too seriously, though: I'm neither a native English speaker nor a phonetician. --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 22:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

::::::::You raise an interesting point about the flap, which ties into your earlier point on /i:r.iŋ/ - /i:.riŋ/, but syllabicity is a notoriously difficult issue in English. The fact that the IPA can't handle ambisyllabic consonants doesn't help any. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 00:54, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
←Is there any way ambisyllabic consonants can contrast with consonants in codas, i.e., can analyzing ''butter'' as /bʌt.ər/ really cause any confusion? (Remember we're talking about phonology. I don't know whether there's a hard-and-fast way to define syllables phonetically, and if there's one I strongly suspect that phonetical syllables don't always coincide with phonological syllables; but that's ''way'' beyond the scope of our transcriptions.) --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 10:40, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
:I've just found [http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/wells/syllabif.htm this] (although I haven't finished reading it yet). It looks very interesting. I would have noticed that /ʃɛl.fɪʃ/ and /sɛlf.ɪʃ/ don't rhyme, but I would have been totally at loss in having to explain how the difference is realized phonetically. (I knew that a voiceless consonant in syllable coda shortens the vowel before it, but I had never realized that this happens with other sonorants such as /l/, too.) --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 10:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

::Nice! I added a couple of its examples to our key. (I'm keeping "moai", because the more common use of the period in our articles is to separate vowels, purely for legibility's sake.)

::BTW, I seriously like your proposal for a /ɑː ~ æ/ symbol (maybe "a:", as I still come across simple "a" for schwa in some articles). The "cloth" proposal wouldn't work so well, IMO, because we don't have good enough control over the editing of the articles to keep it consistent: as it is, both the IPA letter and the length mark separate the two phonemes, and that redundancy is useful. But then "a ~ a:" is a common convention for /ɑː ~ æ/, so using either "a" or "a:" could end up being ambiguous. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 20:18, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

::Wells starts off quite well, and is convincing. However, he soon veers off. Postulating five levels of contrastive stress is just silly, since we're dealing with phonology here, unless I'm misreading him. But he does seem to be confusing post-tonic "stress" with full vowels, and sometimes full vowels with reduced vowels. And his logic becomes a bit iffy with ''petrol'' as {{IPA|/ˈpetr.əl/}}, arguing that coda /tr/ is attested in ''matter-of-fact'' {{IPA|/ˌmætr.ə.ˈfækt/}}, when he gives no justification for the latter. The problem appears to stem from an attempt to pigeon-hole everything into binary categories, when the human brain and language do not operate under binary categories. The /tr/ in ''petrol'' have properties of belonging both to the preceding and following syllable, and forcing a choice wouldn't seem to be productive. Perhaps he could convince me that ''cauldron'' really is {{IPA|/ˈkɔːldr.ən/}}, but it would clearly be difficult for us to transcribe such words that way here on Wikipedia. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 00:45, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

:::My proposal for /a/ and /ɔ/ wasn't 100% serious. Sure, it'd be very useful, but it'd be borderline OR. (The dictionary which is closest to my hand right now writes /dɑːns/ as the only pron. for "dance", despite that there are many speakers — even in the UK — who use /æ/ or freely alternate. Are there dictionaries which ''consistently'' list two pronunciations for words in the BATH set?) And the symbols I proposed was the first ones which occurred to me.
:::As for Wells, a pronunciation of ''matter-of-fact'' with fewer than four syllables and an affricate /tr/ similar to that in "train" would sound quite odd to me, too. But I don't think there are situations in which describing a consonant as ambisyllabic is really necessary from a phonological POV, unless the unsourced section in [[Canadian raising#Varieties]] is true. In that case, transcribing /spaɪd.ər/ would mean that it rhymes with ''rider'', and transcribing /spaɪ.dər/ would mean that the D is unflapped. Anyway, syllables will need to be specified in articles very rarely, so I don't think it will ever be an issue. (I don't think there's any reliable source stating whether Stephen Hawking is [hɔʔkɪŋ] /hɔːk.iŋ/ as the gerund of ''hawk'' or [hɔːkʰɪŋ] /hɔː.kɪŋ/ as "haw king".) --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 10:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
:::<small>(OTOH, it is quite possible that we find a reliable source breaking "Stephen Hawk- / ing" or "Stephen Haw- / king" across the end of a line, but inferring anything about pronunciation from that would be [[WP:SYNTH|original synthesis]]. --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 14:09, 6 July 2009 (UTC))</small>

==Vowel examples should demonstrate a wider range of environments==
I don't want to make the examples cluttered, but it would surely be useful in many cases to demonstrate environments such as before a nasal, or before /l/, as well as before stops or finally. These tend to be the environments where allophonic variation is most likely (apart from before /r/, which has its own section). Instead, we often seem to be duplicating the same environment, which seems in most cases a waste of screen real estate.

For example, /oʊ/ is currently demonstrated by ''beau'', ''hoe'' and ''poke''. Three examples, of which two are word-final, and one before a stop. I would suggest that we include an example like ''pole'', since, in my native dialect at least, the vowel in ''pole'' is phonetically strikingly different from the one in ''poke'', and speakers of similar dialects may have trouble figuring out whether ''pole'' has /oʊ/ or, say, /ɒ/. We could get rid of ''beau'', since it really doesn't add anything to the information conveyed by ''poke'' and ''hoe''.

Similarly, for /ɪ/ we have ''bid'' and ''pit''. Surely it would be worth adding ''pin'', since in some accents this has a striking realization? Similarly for /ɛ/ where we could add ''pen''. In these cases we wouldn't need to remove any examples.

Let me know what you think. [[User:Grover cleveland|Grover cleveland]] ([[User talk:Grover cleveland|talk]]) 14:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

:I've added some, but I can't think of any word ending with /ɒl/, /ɒn/ (except ''gone'' and ''long'' which are pronounced with /ɔː/ in some accents), /ɑːt/, /ɑːd/, /ʊn/, etc. right now. Can you find any? --<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 14:54, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
::For /ɒl/ there's "doll", for /ɒn/ "Don" and "John", for /ɑːt/ there's "[[baht]]" (a word most people don't know, and if they do they know it more from writing than speaking), for /ɑːd/ you might get away with "baaed" (as in the "The sheep baaed at me"); there's also "Marquis de Sade". Wiktionary is unaware of any words ending in /ʊn/, but the sequence occurs in at least some pronunciations of "Sunni". There are several words with /ɑːt/ before a vowel, such as "sonata", "basmati", "legato". Examples of /ɑːd/ before a vowel make me hungry for Mexican food: "enchilada" and "avocado". +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 15:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

:::The illustrations were originally a near-minimal set. Perhaps there's not much value in that? [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 19:54, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
::::Now there are four "near"-minimal sets plus one for free vowels, where "near" means that the syllable onset isn't always the same. It'd be nice to have ''really'' minimal sets, but they would be hard to find and they would likely include very obscure words. I don't think syllable onsets have a significant effect on the realization of vowels, so that's not a real issue. Showing each vowel with different syllable codas, as Grover proposed and I did, is more useful, IMO.--<span style="font-family: monospace; font-weight: 600; color: #00F; background-color: #FFF;">[[User:A. di M.|A. di M.]]</span> (formerly Army1987)<small>&nbsp;—&nbsp;''[[Special:Contributions/A. di M.|Deeds]],&nbsp;not&nbsp;[[User talk:A. di M.|words]]''.</small> 14:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

==Y==
This chart does not have the "Y" symbol used in some articles' pronunciation guides.

I have seen in some articles ([[Greenwich]] - [[Greece]] - [[Guinea]] - [[Gropecunt Lane]]) The pronunciation gives the first sound as a "Y" letter or similar at least, as in Greenwich - /ˈɡrɛnɪtʃ/ I am familiar with these words they all start with a normal "g" sound. Other articles ([[Gorgonzola (cheese)]] - [[Gabon]] - [[Guyana]]) use "g" in the pronunciation, again I am familiar with the words they all have the same normal "g" sound. Here in the pronunciation guide and my own dictionaries all use "g" as a phonetic letter but neither show the "Y" kind of letter in Greenwich - /ˈɡrɛnɪtʃ/. Also when I copy and paste the "Y" from /ˈɡrɛnɪtʃ/ on its own (on my PC at least) it changes to "g" all on its own but not if I copy and paste a word with it in it.

When I read the featured article Gropecunt Lane earlier I initially thought the pronunciation /ˈɡroʊpkʌnt ˈleɪn/ was telling me it isn't pronounced with a "g" sound. I thought it might be some odd Old English pronunciation. When I clicked on the link to this pronunciation guide it doesn't tell me what the "Y" means. Again I am sure it means "g" but have never seen "Y" used in any Dictionary and I can't add it here as it changes to a "g" when I paste it. "Y" appears to be used a lot more often than "g" in articles pronunciation guides so I am sure it is correct. Can someone add it here to the pronunciation chart if it should be here and explain why it's used and where it comes from. I've never seen it before as a "g" in English dictionaries; only when I went to Greece I saw it in use like this as in Agios Nikolaos - (Greek: Άγιος Νικόλαος). But this is not Greek it is English pronunciation guide used in many English words such as Greenwich etc.

[[User:Carlwev|Carlwev]] ([[User talk:Carlwev|talk]]) 03:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
:I think this is a browser bug, which causes a certain type of g character to be displayed as a gamma in some browsers. It's been discussed before - I think we kind of concluded that it would be better to use ordinary g's instead so as to avoid this problem.--[[User:Kotniski|Kotniski]] ([[User talk:Kotniski|talk]]) 04:23, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
::Yes, this is a bug in some fonts that causes {{IPA|ɡ}} to look like Y rather than like g. See [[WP:IPA#Rendering issues]]. +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 06:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

:::What's odd is that it doesn't display the same way in our tables as it does in the articles. Does anyone know why that is?

:::Or actually, why some of those articles displayed one way, and some the other, when all but ''gorgonzola'' used the IPA g. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 06:59, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
::::For me (in Firefox), I was getting the problem when the {{IPA|ɡ}} was preceded by a stress mark, but not otherwise.--[[User:Kotniski|Kotniski]] ([[User talk:Kotniski|talk]]) 07:20, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

:::::So it's a bug in one of the OpenType tables. I can see how that could've slipped by. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 09:31, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

== Semi-protection ==

Is there any reason this article needs to be semi-protected for, what is it now, well over a year? [[User:Tyuia|Tyuia]] ([[User talk:Tyuia|talk]]) 23:14, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

:Because new editors periodically come along and "correct" it, like changing /r/ to /ɹ/. If something needs to be adjusted, every article with English IPA will need to be correspondingly adjusted, or the template will fail to serve our readers. By this point, true corrections like fixing typos (as opposed to theoretical debates) have been taken care of. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 23:44, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Protection is meant to be temporary, and semi-protection is mostly (only?) for vandalism. I doubt IPs are much more prone to the miscorrection you describe than accounts. And no page is "finished"; there are endless possibilities for a contributor to add useful information or clarify what's there.

Moreover, I don't see where the decision to semi-protect in perpetuity was made. Such a decision should have some kind of consensus rather than just happening by default.

And, theoretical debates are a reason to edit, and clearly remain so. There is a flare-up in the archives over noting syllabification which ended with it being largely rejected, yet there is a big fat syllables box on the page as stands.

Given there are clearly many users watching this page, I don't see why it's so much more vital that it be locked than any of the gazillion other Wikipedia-namespace pages, such as [[WP:LEDE]] or [[WP:MOSNUM]]. Hence, I'm inclined to post this to [[WP:RUP]] unless there's a better reason.

[[User:Tyuia|Tyuia]] ([[User talk:Tyuia|talk]]) 07:47, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

:Okay, let's see what happens. Might not be a problem. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 08:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

== Sound Recordings ==

Wouldn't this guide be much easier to follow if recordings of the exact sound were included?
Just a suggestion ;) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/121.216.21.83|121.216.21.83]] ([[User talk:121.216.21.83|talk]]) 10:09, 27 July 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:There is no exact sound, so we'd need separate recordings for each dialect we deem worthy of inclusion. At least for the vowels. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 17:59, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

== "optional" phonemes ==

I'm wondering if we should take a cue from some dictionaries and use superscript letters for phonemes which are not pronounced in all dialects. For example, it's basically impossible to transcribe the 'new' in New York as /nju:/, unless you want a continual edit war. The Brits seem much more amenable to allowing /r/ in for example Herdford, perhaps because they recognize that not all of England is non-rhotic, or maybe just aren't as provincial as Usonians. But even there, there is the occasional deletion of /r/'s (even at the ends of words where it's phonemic in both GA and RP). To be consistent, however, we'd need to do that with US names too, so that ''New York'' would be {{IPA|/nʲuː ˈjɔʳk/}}. If we go that way, {{IPA|/ᵊl/}} for 'syllabic' el might also be the way to go, since for those with a schwa-schwi split, it isn't necessarily schwa. However, I still think final /r/ should be so transcribed. Would this be worthwhile to pursue? or best just to accept the occasional obvious name like ''New York'' not being dialect neutral? (Another option of course is parentheses, but that starts getting difficult to read: {{IPA|/n(j)uː ˈjɔ(r)k/}}.) [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 00:58, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
:The problem with the superscript letters is that they often mean something in the IPA, which can confuse people familiar with the IPA but not our house convention. The current method of a dialect-neutral transcription works pretty well. Isn't RP supposed to have coda /r/ underlyingly? GA doesn't normally feature yod dropping or /hw/ simplification, right? — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 03:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

::Yeah, it may cause more problems than it solves. Just brainstorming here.

::In GA, ''new'' is /'nu/ (IMO actually /'nuw/), not /'nju:/. Yes, RP has phonemic coda /r/ in, say, ''bar'' /'ba:r/, but it does not exist in a word like ''bard,'' which is simply /'ba:d/. But so far we haven't had too much trouble except for American names beginning with "new", and that is such an obvious word that I doubt there's any confusion. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 07:24, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

::What part of footnote 14 isn't clear enough? --<span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: monospace">[[User:A. di M.|A.]] di&nbsp;M.</span> 15:00, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
:::Yes, its current wording, taken verbatim, could cause confusion in rare cases, but I'm going to add "in the same syllable" to it, so that we will able to handle those rare cases by writing /əˈnjuː/ for "anew" and /ʌnˈjuːst/ for "unused". <span style="background: white; color: blue; font-family: monospace">[[User:A. di M.|A.]] di&nbsp;M.</span> 15:06, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

== badges ==

We have used "badge" as and example for "dʒ" but is it not pronounced "dʃ"? I think that is how I pronounce it. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Gregcaletta|Gregcaletta]] ([[User talk:Gregcaletta|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Gregcaletta|contribs]]) 09:13, 3 August 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:There are two main reasons against using dʃ, even in final position. One is that it isn't how linguists or dictionaries transcribe it and the other is that it isn't how anyone pronounces it. It's a lot more likely that you hear dʃ in your own speech because the stop element (the [t]) is very similar to /d/ in other words (like dog). Remember that English /d/ is very often devoiced. — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 09:44, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
::Well I would say that in "badge" the "d" ''is'' voiced but the "sh" at the end is not, but we can leave it the way it is if we're just basing it on what other linguists do. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Gregcaletta|Gregcaletta]] ([[User talk:Gregcaletta|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Gregcaletta|contribs]]) 10:01, 3 August 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::It may well be devoiced to some extent phonetically, but phonemically it's certainly {{IPA|/dʒ/}} (it's fully voiced in the plural ''badges'', for example). And even if we were giving a narrow phonetic transcription it would probably be preferably to use the underring diacritic to indicate devoicing rather than {{IPA|"dʃ"}}. +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 10:44, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

== [[Hertfordshire]] ==

There's an edit war going on at [[Hertfordshire]] between [[User:Kwamikagami|an editor]] and an [[User talk:82.18.218.52|IP]]. After watching this go round a couple of times I decided to intervene. I looked up the pronunciation in the online [[OED]] and found it agrees with the IP. The editor accuses me of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hertfordshire&diff=306165680&oldid=306164596 "screwing w the IPA"]. Since he/she also pointed at this project I hope we can get some impartial judgement on this issue. But then, I thought I was impartial 'til my edit was so rudely reverted. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 07:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:The OED and Wikipedia have different transcription conventions, which is probably the source of confusion here. What we transcribe as {{IPA|ɑr}} the OED transcribes as {{IPA|ɑː}} and what we transcribe as {{IPA|ər}} the OED transcribes as {{IPA|ə}}. The reverse isn't always true, however. These differences allow us to indicate the distinction between the vowel of ''barn'' and the vowel of ''balm'' as well as between ''capper'' and ''Kappa''-- something the OED doesn't indicate but that rhotic dialects make.
:Looking at the edit history it seems that both the anon editor and Bazj were unfamiliar with this. Perhaps when dealing with potentially contentious editing or edit wars, we should initially point out this project in the edit summary. Something like:
::''Fixed IPA according to Wikipedia conventions. For details/guidelines, see [[WP:IPA for English]]''
:I think everyone here is acting in good faith, but with an edit summary like this, we can avoid accidentally biting people who simply don't know better. — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 08:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
::That's a good way to word it. (I do tend to get rude when the same battle is repeated over and over, when it's no fault of the new editors who haven't been through it before. I apologized to Bazj on my talk page.) [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 09:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:::From our discussion over at [[User talk:Kwamikagami|Kwamikagami's talk page]] I can see where you're coming from. However I have a number of reservations...
:::*<small>''a minor point''</small> Unless you mark all your edits with a pointer to the project you can only expect to have the edits judged by standard reference works such as [[OED]], [[Webster's Dictionary|Webster's]], [[Chambers Dictionary|Chambers]], or [[The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language|AHD]]. In the absence of such a pointer edit conflicts are inevitable.
:::* Having a Wikipedia transcription convention is [[WP:OR]]. It also means that transcription's cannot be checked against any other material, which violates [[WP:Verifiability]]. <small>''(I see [[Help talk:Pronunciation/Archive 1#Controversial, OR|the question]] of [[WP:OR]] has been raised before, but it collapsed into a discussion of the editor's skills at IPA rather than the key issue of [[WP:OR]]).''</small>
:::* When it comes to place names, local trumps international. Isn't that why [[Beijing]] is now preferred over [[Peking]], and [[Kolkata]] over [[Calcutta]]?
:::[[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 11:40, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
::::Having a Wikipedia transcription convention is by no stretch of the imagination OR. We're not deciding ourselves what the pronunciations of these places are, we're simply presenting verifiable pronunciation information in a uniform fashion. Beijing and Kolkata have nothing to do with anything; they're Latin-alphabet transliterations of the native names which have (comparatively recently) become established in English usage. Other places are still best known by their English names ([[Rome]], [[Cologne]], [[Munich]], etc.), not their native names. By using a pan-dialectal transcription, we avoid ambiguity and make sure everyone's pronunciations are included; moreover, there may be more than one local pronunciation of a place. (For example, I know two people from [[Exeter]]: one is working class and calls it {{IPA|[ˈɛksətɚ]}}; the other is university-educated and calls it {{IPA|[ˈɛksətə]}}. Both are local pronunciations.) In addition, locals are not the only people entitled to utter the name of a place; Americans (for example) may want to speak of Hertfordshire too, and it would be an error for them to pronounce it {{IPA|[ˈhɑːfədʃə]}}. It would be absurd for us to give different pronunciations for, say, [[Jersey]] and [[New Jersey]], since the two names are pronounced identically in any given dialect. +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 14:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::It doesn't stretch my imagination in any way. In the case of Hertfordshire I can go to the OED and see a transcription. That's verifiable. The Wikipedia transcription exists only on Wikipedia, hence NOT verifiable, so it's OR. Seems simple enough to me. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 15:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::Actually, it doesn't. Go to [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Hertfordshire] and click on "Show IPA". Or look in the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary. The OED is not actually the only dictionary on the planet. +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 15:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Angr, At no point have I claimed OED is the only dictionary on the planet. I listed 4 in my earlier posting. The OED just happens to be my preference, and the one made available online via my local library. I'm not sure what point you're making with the link you posted, their transcription matches neither the OED nor the article.
:::::::*Your link to reference.com (which I understand is the [[The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language|AHD]]) has /ˈhɑrfərdˌʃɪər, -ʃər, ˈhɑrt-/.
:::::::*[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Hertfordshire Merriam-Websters] has \ˈhär-fərd-ˌshir, ˈhärt-, -shər, US also ˈhərt-\
:::::::*[http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50105374?single=1&query_type=word&queryword=Hertfordshire&first=1&max_to_show=10 The OED has] (ˈhɑːfədʃə(r), ˈhɑːt-)
:::::::*[http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/Hertfordshire Longman's online version] unfortunately doesn't carry the IPA.
:::::::*[http://www.chambersharrap.co.uk/search Chambers] doesn't seem to have proper nouns.
:::::::None of these matches the article's /ˈhɑrfədʃər/. The Wikipedia transcription is simply not verifiable, it's OR. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 16:34, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::::{{IPA|/ˈhɑrfədʃər/}} is wrong, it should be {{IPA|/ˈhɑrfərdʃər/}}, which matches reference.com's second option and (with a trivial conversion of transcription systems) MW's second option for the final syllable. +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 16:47, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::Now they're '''''all''''' wrong? Lack of verifiability doesn't even start to do justice to this. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 17:05, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::No, they're not all wrong. Kwami made a typo; he should have written {{IPA|/ˈhɑrfərdʃər/}} instead of {{IPA|/ˈhɑrfədʃər/}}. +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 17:13, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::That doesn't agree with any of the 4 transcriptions in his 10 edits over the last 2 years, ˈhɑrfədʃər 3 times, /ˈhɑrtfərdʃər/ 3 times, /ˈhɑːtfʊdʃɪɚ/ once, and ˈhɑːtfʊdʃə 3 times. The latest editor's gone along with your pointer to reference.com and used /ˈhɑr(t)fərdˌʃ(ɪ)ər/. At least that one's verifiable. But I'm sure if we wait a couple of hours another editor will come along with another version.
:::::::::::The fact that someone who knows the subject can come up with 4 conflicting versions shows the importance of verifiability. Without it this edit war is just going to run and run. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 17:53, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::What are you advocating, exactly? — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 18:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::I favour following the [[Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines|policies]] on [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability]], [[Wikipedia:No original research|OR]] and [[Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines#Content|consistency]]. In this case that means using a reliable source ~ a dictionary. If there's a transcription on [[wiktionary]], that should be the first choice; failing that one dictionary should be chosen and used consistently. Despite Angr's view of me, I wouldn't choose the OED, because it's not freely accessible. Finally the source needs to be [[Wikipedia:Citing sources|cited]]. Just what you'd expect of anything in Wikipedia really. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 19:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::::::::Any argument on that article should be over the pronunciation (the OED doesn't have /ʃɪər/, for example), not over the transcription. If you want to change the transcription, the place to do it is here, so that it applies to all articles equally. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 18:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::::I have no problem with the pronunciation given in the audio clip. The problem lies in converting it to a verifiable, non-OR, consistent, citable transcription. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 19:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Sorry but in pronunciation you cannot both advocate verifiability and consistency at the same time. Phonetic transcription is inherently inconsistent in the sense it varies from publishing house to publishing house. And in this case, a consistent approach to IPA on Wikipedia wins hands down over "verifiability" (unless you're advocating some massive page listing all the divergent IPA systems used to transcribe words across Wikipedia) which I think is being abused as a policy here as it's not so much the actual pronunciation that's in question but the question of how we write it. I think we shouldn't lose track of the spirit of the verifiability policy over common sense. [[User:Akerbeltz|Akerbeltz]] ([[User talk:Akerbeltz|talk]]) 19:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:"it's not so much the actual pronunciation that's in question but the question of how we write it" ~ we are in agreement on that point.
:"it varies from publishing house to publishing house" ~ so if the same publisher is consistently used as a source we get consistency and verifiability.
:Verifiability should not have been ditched in the quest for consistency. Nor should the prohibition on OR. A pre-existing scheme should have been settled on and used consistently. That would satisfy the rules on verifiability, OR and consistency. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 21:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
::For that approach to work, you'd need a single publisher that has IPA for every word that's in question here. Since such a source does not exist, clearly that's not a workable approach then? [[User:Akerbeltz|Akerbeltz]] ([[User talk:Akerbeltz|talk]]) 21:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:::Using such a source (despite its limitations) allows the IPA-illiterate to contribute in seconds. The [[WP:OR]] "Wikipedia Transcription Method" reduces the available pool of editors to those:
:::* who have some understanding of IPA,
:::* who have knowledge of the pronunciation of the word in question,
:::* who are willing to set aside the IPA methodology they know,
:::* who have the time to read up the Wiki method, and
:::* the have the time to transcribe the word.
:::This is a vanishingly small pool of editors.
:::''"Since such a source does not exist"'' - Reference.com from what I've seen has pretty solid coverage. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 14:19, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
::And I still think quoting the verifiability guideline for IPA transcription of words with a known pronunciation is spurious. We're not debating the veracity of a fact, just how to spell it out. I mean, if there was an argument over it being a velar vs a dental fricative, then yes, verifiability by all means. But here?? And incidentally, I don't think any of the printed ancyclopedias "verifiy" their IPA en masse, maybe in some controversial cases but overall, they'll just apply their in-house style across the book. [[User:Akerbeltz|Akerbeltz]] ([[User talk:Akerbeltz|talk]]) 21:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:::Wikipedia's rules don't ask us to verify other encyclopedias, merely to use them as verification for what's written in wikipedia. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 14:19, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
::::It's a naive assumption that an IPA illiterate or near illiterate editor will contribute in a helpful way using such a source. I have taught phonology related topics to the "masses" for decades and you'd have a hard job a) convincing me that IPA illiterate people even notice the IPA and b) are willing to touch it in any shape or form. And such contributions would have to be checked by a third party in any case because you and I may know the difference between e ə and ɘ when we see it, but most people will end up entering the wrong one and then people like kwami can trawl through hundreds of pages checking it was done right... This is one of those topics where less haste is more speed by relying on people literate in IPA and phonetics enough to be able to adjust whatever source to the "Wiki standard". [[User:Akerbeltz|Akerbeltz]] ([[User talk:Akerbeltz|talk]]) 14:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::This being a wiki, there's no requirement that you add pronunciation information in picture-perfect IPA that conforms to Wikipedia's transcription convention, merely that you not edit-war about it when someone else tidies up your pronunciation information so it does conform. +[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 14:36, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::There lies the problem with the [[WP:OR]] Wikipedia transcription convention. When you have an IPA-literate editor putting on the WP IPA with no verifiable source, and an IPA-illiterate editor who has picked up a transcription from a dictionary/encyclopedia with an impeccably verifiable source, then conflict is almost inevitable. The more I think on it the more I'm surprised there aren't more edit wars on IPA transcriptions. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 14:51, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::::That's an impersonal assumption of bad faith. The main reason why an edit war would start is because editors might not realize our transcription system is different and why. This is why I recommended the edit summary above. — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 19:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
That's because most people don't have a problem with the system advocated/used on Wikipedia... [[User:Akerbeltz|Akerbeltz]] ([[User talk:Akerbeltz|talk]]) 16:40, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
:More likely they view it as irrelevant to their needs and incomprehensible. [[User:Bazj|Bazj]] ([[User talk:Bazj|talk]]) 16:49, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
::Don't we have a help page somewhere that aids in seeing the differences in pronunciation indicators accross dictionaries and whatnot? — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 19:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
:::Do you mean [[Pronunciation respelling for English]]?
::::Yeah, that's what I was thinking of, though it's not in help: or WP: space. Perhaps we can create a help/WP page for editors like Bazj (and to a certain extent, myself) who may need help translating the information they get from dictionaries into Wikipedia's IPA transcription scheme. — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 23:20, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::That has two dict. IPA schemes on the left. We could copy those and add more. One problem, however, is when the dict. uses multiple transcriptions. It may be difficult to tell when that means there is actually more than one distinction pronunciation, as opposed to regional variation. So, for example, dict.com frequently lists both /ɔr/ and /ɔər/, which only reflects the fact that many speakers do not distinguish ''horse'' from ''hoarse,'' not that speakers who do make the distinction vary as to which they use. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 00:53, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
::::::Yeah, we should make it clear when a dictionary doesn't make a certain distinction. — [[User:Aeusoes1|Ƶ§œš¹]] <span title="Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" class="IPA">[[User talk:aeusoes1|<small><sub>[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]</sub></small>]]</span> 05:04, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
:::::::I started a draught guide [[Help:IPA conventions for English|here]], so far not linked to anything but this talk page. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 08:29, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

::::So what you're really saying is that you're the only one who has an issue with it? [[User:Akerbeltz|Akerbeltz]] ([[User talk:Akerbeltz|talk]]) 21:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

The original objection was having /r/ in the name of a place where people have a non-rhotic accent. This hasn't been much of a problem—occasionally s.o. gets upset about 'cultural imperialism' or the like, but for the most part Brits seem willing to accept it. (And of course we can always add a non-rhotic local pronunciation if need be.) This is a more tolerant attitude than I expected at first, and in marked contrast to /ju:/ after /t, d, n/ in US place names, which tends to make people go berserk. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 22:26, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

== Optional phonemes, continued ==

Picking up on the discussion above, if indeed this page is still open to proposals, I'd like to chime in. I had a recent experience where a [[John Derbyshire|columnist]] wrote a piece [http://johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/Culture/gossipedia.html excoriating] my transcription of his name. If I could respond (he's not Wikipedia-savvy), I could direct him to this page or explain stuff about accents and transcription and so on. I might even suggest a [phonetic] transcription beside the /quasi-phonemic/ one. (I verified on YouTube that he is non-rhotic (and TRAP-BATH split, etc.).)

This does support the superscripted-r idea. Whatever other meaning it has in the IPA is not really relevant; an in-house system can shake things up if need be (there's consensus on this point now I think). The best argument against it is that (according to Kwami) it mostly hasn't been a problem; a comment here was that even London placenames are transcribed rhotically without complaint.

Anyway, here is a proposal for the yod: '''transcribe as /ɪu/ instead of /ju/'''. My arguments:

* Many accents use this very pronunciation

* It does feel more like a diphthong than a consonant cluster. E.g., /stj/ is an odd cluster, occuring in no other context.

* /j/ means something on its own, whereas /ɪu/ is funny linguistics stuff people will have to look up before objecting, and this page will tell them what they need to know. /nɪu jɔrk/ may be more palatable (although I don't know why it needs a pronunciation guide...), and /kɪut/ isn't hard to understand.

* Right now it seems RP decides if the yod is in, but once we're poised against complaints, we can extend to other contexts, e.g., ''blue'', ''chute'', ''chew'', ''rude'', ''abstruse''. Why not? (Some yods will get missed, but in cases where few pronounce them anyway.) Word-initially, it's probably best to stick to /ju/ (''maybe'' /jɪu/).

What do you all think? I reali(s/z)e it's not a perfect proposal.

One more comment: /ɔər/ just bugs me. The other "breaking" diphthongs can be justified by actual (widespread) use, but this one? /oːr/ would confuse no one and have an immediately clear pronunciation in all dialects, which is not the case with /ɔər/. Also, this vowel is different from the others; in other cases the "short" version (/ɪr/, etc.) is almost only pre-vocalic, but not /ɔr/. Finally, a lot of the displeasure in the archives cites this one part of the system, and no doubt there is more unexpressed displeasure out there. (And, I'm not sure it's even being used; [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=George_Soros&oldid=306108836 George Soros] can't be right.)

[[User:Tyuia|Tyuia]] ([[User talk:Tyuia|talk]]) 22:13, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


Why is ɪ appearing twice, both under "Vowels" and "Weak vowels"? If we need two entries here, I would expect separate symbols (even if one is a modification of the other with a combining mark of some kind). <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 22:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
:I personally like the superscript ''r.'' All that would mean in IPA is something like 'r-colored', which we might be able to argue successfully. At the ends of words it's simply /r/ phonemically, but it might be a wise concession to write it superscript there too. Would we only have such transcriptions for non-rhotic personal and place names?
:I believe the double entries for //ɪ// and //oʊ// are mainly there for historic reasons, back from the day when we were propagating our own idiosyncratic symbols for the weak vowel versions of the two. I have tentatively unified the symbols, keeping all the content. --[[User:J. 'mach' wust|mach]] [[User talk:J. 'mach' wust|&#x1f648;&#x1f649;&#x1f64a;]] 06:11, 1 May 2024 (UTC)


== Colons for length symbols ==
:If we're going to go that route, I'd suggest superscript ''j'' for the analogous situation in /nju: jork/.


In the 3rd bullet point of the Dialect variation section colons are used in place of length symbols:
:I don't get the point of /iu/. If we're going to transcribe ''ewe'' /ju:/, why not be consistent with ''cute'' /kju:t/?
: Most speakers of North American English (with the exception of Eastern New England) do not distinguish between the vowels in father /'fɑ:ðər/ and bother /'bɒðər/, pronouncing the two words as rhymes. If you speak such a dialect, ignore the difference between the symbols /ɑ:/ and /ɒ/.


I think they need to be replaced. [[Special:Contributions/2001:BB6:B84C:CF00:B1A9:DA55:640A:FC65|2001:BB6:B84C:CF00:B1A9:DA55:640A:FC65]] ([[User talk:2001:BB6:B84C:CF00:B1A9:DA55:640A:FC65|talk]]) 20:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
:/our./ is more variable in its dictionary conventions than most r-colored vowels. That is certainly something we can discuss. It would also be a fairly simple task to go through all IPA-en transclusions and replace it systematically with AWB if we decide on a change; we'd just want to be sure a good majority is on board before we do that. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 06:56, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
::Somebody mentioned above that superscripted r has another meaning in IPA, but I cannot find any evidence of that in the IPA handbook. So we would be free to use it for an optional r. Similarly we could do use supercript j for optional /j/ before /u/, since it is close enough to the meaning of palatalised that it has in IPA. This would leave us with a reasonably intuitive {{IPA|/n<sup>j</sup>uː ˈjɔ<sup>r</sup>k/}}. &minus;[[User:Woodstone|Woodstone]] ([[User talk:Woodstone|talk]]) 08:04, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


:Done. [[User:Nardog|Nardog]] ([[User talk:Nardog|talk]]) 22:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
:::No, it has no defined IPA usage. However, any IPA letter can be subscripted to signify a 'coloring' of the preceding letter. So, for example, superscript schwa or t is often used for epenthesis ([dæn<sup>t</sup>s]), superscript j or w for diphthongs (English [iʲ] and [uʷ]), s or r for fricative or trilled release, etc. An "r-colored vowel" use would be in line with that convention. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 08:49, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


== Inclusion of /ts/ as a marginal phoneme and removal of /ʔ/ ==
Superscripting is an awfully big solution if it's not a problem. I'd wait till rampaging mobs of RP speakers demand it; otherwise we have to change to /dɛnvə<sup>r</sup>/, /pɔə<sup>r</sup>tlənd/, and thousands more, which seems silly. The yod problem, on the other hand, is really causing edit wars.


/ʔ/ is an entirely paralinguistic sound and "uh-oh" is not a valid word to base the inclusion of a marginal phoneme around. However, seeing and /ts/ is a common marginal phoneme in words like "tsar" or "Mozart", including it would probably be valid. [[User:Plexus96|Plexus96]] ([[User talk:Plexus96|talk]]) 14:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
What is an "optional /j/"? /bju:ti/? /strju:n/? Or are these required and disallowed, respectively?


:/ʔ/ is included for Hawaiian loans. It's illustrated by ''uh-oh'' simply because it's one of the most common and intuitive ways to illustrate the sound; it doesn't mean it's only used in paralanguage.
The point of /ɪu/ is, among the reasons noted, that /nju:/ sure ''looks'' like it's sounded /n/ + /j/ + /u:/, and that's what throws people. But a diphthong cannot be expected to yield to such decomposition; I don't think /oʊ/ matches any major dialect. A variety of reasons may explain why the /r/ doesn't annoy non-rhotic speakers as much, such as it ''never'' being pronounced in such a position (cf. /nu: mɛnju:/), and it being spelt thus in plain text, and it being sounded in dialects familiar to them.
:/t/ and /s/ are already phonemes so there's no need to list /ts/ separately. [[User:Nardog|Nardog]] ([[User talk:Nardog|talk]]) 00:42, 18 May 2024 (UTC)


== IPA overwhelming ==
The reason for the inconsistency is that ''you'' and ''ewe'' are homophones almost everywhere, including I believe East Anglia, which drops yods like crazy. Call it a compromise of purity with the facts on the ground.


IPA is overwhelming, redundant, and not user friendly. If you use the basic latin sounds the phonics are all there and we all know them. No need to learn a whole new set of sounds that are extremely numerous and cumbersome. [[Special:Contributions/136.143.149.206|136.143.149.206]] ([[User talk:136.143.149.206|talk]]) 17:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Does anyone find /fɔərd/ easier to understand and more sensible than /fo:rd/ (or /ford/)?


:We don't "all know them", though. Your west coast US pronunciation will be different from mine. [[WP:RESPELL]] describes how simple pronunciation guides don't always work. For instance, I pronounce "[[English-language vowel changes before historic /r/|"Mary", "marry", and "merry"]] differently, but know that some Americans don't. The same applies to [[Cot–caught merger|"cot" and "caught"]]. Some of my compatriots pronounce [[Trap–bath split|"aren't" and "aunt"]] differently, but I don't. [[User:Bazza_7|Bazza&nbsp;<span style="color:grey">7</span>]] ([[User_talk:Bazza_7|talk]]) 18:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
[[User:Tyuia|Tyuia]] ([[User talk:Tyuia|talk]]) 09:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


== Text on secondary stress ==
:'Optional' j is j in ju: after d,t,n, etc.
:/ɔə(r)/ is the OED convention, so it's pretty well established. Best to avoid the five basic vowels, as in /or/, because they're so ambiguous. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 10:21, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


On the help page, we show both primary and secondary stress marks, yet we never define how we do (or don't) use those symbols in the diaphonemic system. I believe the last chat we had arriving at some consensus was [[Help_talk:IPA/English/Archive_26#Secondary_stress|here]], where we agreed on WP to assign secondary stress only to a strong vowel ''preceding'' primary stress but not to a strong vowel ''succeeding'' it (i.e., following the British rather than American convention). It seems like it would be helpful to explain this, and even the concept of how secondary stress operates in English at all, if anyone can think of a concise wording for the concept. [[User:Wolfdog|Wolfdog]] ([[User talk:Wolfdog|talk]]) 12:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
I'd assume /ə'sju:m/, /ɪn 'lju: əv/, but not /flju:t/ or /sju:t/ or /ɪsju:/? OED uses /ɔ:/, does it not? /ɔə/ was from when London was less NORTH-FORCE merged and the vowel was pronounced that way. K&amp;K use /or/, so it also has precedent. Is /o:r/ also ambiguous? I'm not sure I understand your concern there. [[User:Tyuia|Tyuia]] ([[User talk:Tyuia|talk]]) 16:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:28, 19 June 2024

For requests for transcription, see Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language.

Double entry

Why is ɪ appearing twice, both under "Vowels" and "Weak vowels"? If we need two entries here, I would expect separate symbols (even if one is a modification of the other with a combining mark of some kind).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the double entries for //ɪ// and //oʊ// are mainly there for historic reasons, back from the day when we were propagating our own idiosyncratic symbols for the weak vowel versions of the two. I have tentatively unified the symbols, keeping all the content. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 06:11, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Colons for length symbols

In the 3rd bullet point of the Dialect variation section colons are used in place of length symbols:

Most speakers of North American English (with the exception of Eastern New England) do not distinguish between the vowels in father /'fɑ:ðər/ and bother /'bɒðər/, pronouncing the two words as rhymes. If you speak such a dialect, ignore the difference between the symbols /ɑ:/ and /ɒ/.

I think they need to be replaced. 2001:BB6:B84C:CF00:B1A9:DA55:640A:FC65 (talk) 20:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Nardog (talk) 22:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of /ts/ as a marginal phoneme and removal of /ʔ/

/ʔ/ is an entirely paralinguistic sound and "uh-oh" is not a valid word to base the inclusion of a marginal phoneme around. However, seeing and /ts/ is a common marginal phoneme in words like "tsar" or "Mozart", including it would probably be valid. Plexus96 (talk) 14:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

/ʔ/ is included for Hawaiian loans. It's illustrated by uh-oh simply because it's one of the most common and intuitive ways to illustrate the sound; it doesn't mean it's only used in paralanguage.
/t/ and /s/ are already phonemes so there's no need to list /ts/ separately. Nardog (talk) 00:42, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IPA overwhelming

IPA is overwhelming, redundant, and not user friendly. If you use the basic latin sounds the phonics are all there and we all know them. No need to learn a whole new set of sounds that are extremely numerous and cumbersome. 136.143.149.206 (talk) 17:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't "all know them", though. Your west coast US pronunciation will be different from mine. WP:RESPELL describes how simple pronunciation guides don't always work. For instance, I pronounce ""Mary", "marry", and "merry" differently, but know that some Americans don't. The same applies to "cot" and "caught". Some of my compatriots pronounce "aren't" and "aunt" differently, but I don't. Bazza 7 (talk) 18:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Text on secondary stress

On the help page, we show both primary and secondary stress marks, yet we never define how we do (or don't) use those symbols in the diaphonemic system. I believe the last chat we had arriving at some consensus was here, where we agreed on WP to assign secondary stress only to a strong vowel preceding primary stress but not to a strong vowel succeeding it (i.e., following the British rather than American convention). It seems like it would be helpful to explain this, and even the concept of how secondary stress operates in English at all, if anyone can think of a concise wording for the concept. Wolfdog (talk) 12:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help_talk:IPA/English&diff=1229952981&oldid=306998376

Leave a Reply