Talk:Ojibwa-Potawatomi-Ottawa language

message: :more on the Ojibwemowin dialect
# specific examples of differences and similarities across all dialects
# re-word each of the dialect descriptions to be less confusing
# examples of language use differences between ritual Anishinaabemowin and the secular Anishinaabemowin
# better referencing across all article sections
Otherwise, the article is very good.  All the extra information have already been summarised and placed in this article while the specifics of the article were given their own articles as further details.  Special thanks to BentRedNewt/Whimemsz for all the dedicated efforts!! CJLippert 18:02, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: To do to improve

message: Discussion moved to Talk:Anishinaabe language dialects#Another split? CJLippert 15:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Another split?

message: How do I display the characters for ᐊᓂᔑᓈᐯᒧᐎᓐ?
ICE77 -- 81.104.129.226 20:44, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In order to see these characters, you will need fonts with the Unified Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics (UCAS) range of UniCode.  There are several fonts out there containing the UCAS range, such as Ballymun RO or Code2000, but if you go to Chris' LanguageGeek site at http://www.languagegeek.com and follow the "download" option, you can get the fonts of his creations in the UCAS range as well.  Place the font in your computer's Font file, and voila!.  Check the CAS article for more details. CJLippert 01:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I want to display ᐊᓂᔑᓈᐯᒧᐎᓐ 

message: While  is, I think, a valid phonemic rendering of Anishinaabemowin for some dialects (although in practice the  is generally realized in those dialects as , as far as I know), I'm not sure  really is. As far as I know, the fortis fricatives are never pronounced as aspirated (, , etc. are difficult to distinguish from plain , , etc. in any case) in any dialect. It seems to me that it would be more accurate to give the alternate phonemic representation as  instead of . But I could be wrong! (Of course, there's also a question of whether, say,  and the like should be included as well...) --Miskwito (talk) 20:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, there isn't a consistent pronunciation of the fortis sounds (let alone lenis sounds) across Anishinaabemowin, which is why there are so many different ways to represent the sound: Fiero zh \ sh can be  (think of the syllabics), ,  (think of Leonard Bloomfield) or  (think of Charles Fiero).  Also, among some speakers, instead of ,  is instead heard.  So what ought to be the primary representation?  I don't know.  My guess is good as yours.  However, I would caution that whatever that is chosen should match the article body. CJLippert (talk) 22:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not a native speaker of Anishinaabemowin, but I think that the phonemic representation  is best. Lengthening or post-aspiration, to my knowledge, might be best viewed as phonetic realizations of the underlying form rather than the phonemic form itself, if we want to contrast /*/ and [*].In Anishininiimowin, to my knowledge, the phoneme ᐦ  and ᐡ  seem totally seperate. I have also read somewhere on Wikipedia that certain dialects of Anishinaabemowin change an initial lenis consonant of a verb when it is immediately following a certain preverb (like gii-, I believe), which, to me, suggests that a fortis consonant is actually composed of a sequence of a fortis-making element (e.g. h) and the corresponding lenis consonant, in that order.What do you think about this?--Jeziorko (talk) 19:19, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Again, though it is very tempting to go with just the  representation, it would be outright error in many Anishinaabemowin areas. Though it would clutter things, it might be better if we include both  and  as well as this article discusses primarily the non-syncoped form of the language. I think that it would also be good idea to add two most common pronunciations of "Anishinaabemowin" in each of the dialects discussed in the Anishinaabe language dialects article so that the reader could see the variations we're discussing here. CJLippert (talk) 08:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm just considering the fact that /*/ is supposed to be an underlying representation, which perhaps is common across all dialects, including the vowel-syncopating ones, because even vowel syncope can be derived from a common-Anishinaabe underlying representation. On the other side, one could, like mentioned, show the surface pronunciations, but using [*] brackets, showing many dialect forms. These being on the side of the main article, I don't think they would clutter things too much. One could also have audio buttons, as IPA symbols can be meaningful to only so many people.--Jeziorko (talk) 06:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation of language name 

message: I've been wondering: Is there an Anishinaabemowin Wikipedia in plan?--Jeziorko (talk) 02:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No oj.wikipedia.org in the plans. However, there are several entries at Wiktionary. If an oj.wiki were to be started, the big question would be how the information would be displayed: roman (and if so, which orthography), syllabics (and if so, which orthography) or both? At cr.wikipedia.org, the results have been mixed. CJLippert (talk) 15:50, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia in Anishinaabemowin