Talk:Close-mid front unrounded vowel

message: I am trying to pronounce this [e] sound accurately, but with my Canadian English dialect, I always seem to end up gliding it.  I am trying to hold my tongue and jaw as still as possible when pronouncing it, but a glide always seems to make it into my pronunciation.  Is there a technique I need to know to keep my mouth very still so as to pronounce [e] accurately?  Denelson83  00:04, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For me as a Kansan, I find it relatively easy, but this might help (mind you, I never have a machine saying what I did, so I could still have some offglidage): your tongue should just barely touch the back of your front-bottom teeth, when you open your mouth keep opening it until you quit blowing out air, then close it.  I hope it helps.Cameron Nedland 14:56, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

message: Does anyone have any sources for this?Cameron Nedland 14:56, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  California "careful speech" bullshit 

message: Since we decided a year ago to split the close central and near-close central vowels, thus deviating from the official IPA vowel chart layout, I propose that we do the same for the mid vowels.  Right now, the mid vowels are in the close-mid vowel articles as subsections and I say we ought to split them so that we'll have, for example, Close-mid front unrounded vowel, Mid front unrounded vowel, and Open-mid front unrounded vowel.  This proposal goes for any of the close-mid vowel articles and, as such, I've marked them.  We may also want to apply this to our article on Mid central vowel, splitting it into Mid central unrounded vowel and Mid central rounded vowel.  Thoughts? — Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 02:36, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Pro: these articles' introductions talk solely about the vowel after which the articles are named. Within the body of the articles the mid vowels are then suddenly mentioned. And if those central vowels merit their own articles, why not the mid vowels, being quite common cross-linguistically? I would then want to suggest expansion of all the (eight) articles after the splits, as the information about the vowels is sketchy at best. --JorisvS (talk) 20:29, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Pro: Mid-vowels are important to distinguish from close-mid and open-mid vowels because their presences are associated with different phonemic signatures - the mid-vowels with 3-height systems and the close-mid and open-mid vowels with 4-height systems. Counter-examples are noticeable and I assume relatively few. So the vowels themselves are independently notable. ᛭ LokiClock (talk) 04:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like nothing is standing in the way of this, so I've created Mid front unrounded vowel and moved the content to demonstrate how to do it for anybody with time and/or ambition. — Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 19:09, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a good division, i think  (open front unrounded vowel) and  (open central unrounded vowel) should have independent pages as well, same as central  and  do. Jɑυмe (xarrades) 23:35, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like they already do. — Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 01:11, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Split

message: I'm no expert on phonology, I'm simply a native speaker of Polish who has never heard anything close to the sound on the recording in his life. The example given in the table is "dzień"  - I've checked it in my Polish-English dictionary, which happens to have pronunciation written for both English and Polish words, and it is  in it. Polish Wiktionary gives , English one  - all of them agree with me there is  instead of . So I think that either this example is completely wrong or it is at least misspelt. Lampak (talk) 10:48, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the vowel in dzień is indeed .  However, as Polish phonology states, when   is between palatal or palatalized consonants, it has a close-mid allophone.  This is the difference between phonemes (indicated in slashes) and allophones (indicated in square brackets).  I hope this and my recent edit have cleared this up for you. — Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 15:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

text: Polish Wiktionary transcribes it , not . Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 15:04, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  /e/ in Polish 

message: Shosted and Chikovani 2006 does not provide a transcription of Georgian მეფე or any other Georgian word with this vowel.  The IPA transcription is accurate, though, so it would be nice if the actual citation could be provided!
Zupancic (talk) 11:59, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, you're right.  I was the one who the citation (though not the example) and I'm not sure what I was thinking.  Seems like should remove the citation and find a better one. — Æµ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 13:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation Wrong for Georgian Example 

message: I believe the sound given this symbol (e:) is INCORRECT. It is identical to the sound for the letter immediately above (that sounds like "ee" in "hee hee.") The evidence that the sound assigned is erroneous is the example German word "Klee" followed by the note 'sounds like e in "hey"' ('Klee' sounds like the English word "Clay", which is not an open-E sound at all.) -- ecsd @ Berkeley:CA:US 18:34 UTC 9 July 2013
:No, you just can't hear the difference. For people trained to hear it (as well as native speakers of French or German) the difference is very obvious. Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 14:27, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apparently INCORRECT Sound Assigned For This Symbol 

message: The example (шея) seems wrong.  It is clearly   not e.  Look at the example for  : Это. These two words are pronounced EXACTLY the same. --207.250.96.103 20:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't confuse phonemes, which are transcribed between slashes (like this: ) with allophones, which are transcribed between brackets (like this: ). Russian has one  phoneme, but 5 phonetic realizations of it: , , ,  and . Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 15:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

text: By the way, you can also count  and  as unstressed allophones of  (and , as they do not contrast when unstressed). These and the aforementioned five realizations make for total of seven phonetic realizations. Peter238 (talk) 16:57, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  /e/ in Russian 

message: It is somewhere between this and [ɛ]. — 81.173.227.144 (talk) 18:39, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The source says otherwise, and that's what we follow (as we should). Also, please read WP:NOTAFORUM - I had to remove a large part of your comment, which was off-topic. Mr KEBAB (talk) 18:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Luxemburgisch ”drécken” is NOT EVER pronounced with a close-mid front unrounded vowel. 

message: Can you explain the situation? So the sound file only seems to show up when ipa symbol=e is there, so should we not have a sound file there or is there a more proper way to display it? I have been looking around and seeing missing sound files from several IPA articles, and I haven't found why exactly this is other than the lack of this line seemingly causing it. Compare how Schwa does have ipa symbol=ə which causes the sound file to display (for me). — Knyȝt (talk) 21:31, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, this is all my fault.  is now prerequisite in Infobox IPA. Will add them where they are not present. Nardog (talk) 23:18, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  No sound file 

message: It sounds like two sounds are being pronounced: it starts at [e] but ends at [i]. Was very confusing when comparing [e] to [ɛ] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:F598:B40A:490:308A:7A99:CDC1:F021 (talk) 15:24, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the quality changes much, but it's creaky-voiced towards the end. Which is a natural phenomenon when you're running out of air in the lungs, but as an illustration it might be misleading. Nardog (talk) 01:31, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  I hate the sound file for this one 

message: May we get a sound example that is not drawn out creeky-voice guy? (besides, he is pronouncing it higher/closer than cardinal ⟨e⟩, moving closer the realm of [i]) Bladesinger46n2 (talk) 06:31, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  creaky voice weirdness on sound file 

message: As a previous comment pointed out, the audio file sounds clearly diphthongised to my ears, so I decided to check it out in Praat and indeed there is a slight drop in F1 frequency about where it sounds like the second part of the diphthong begins. Stockhausenfan (talk) 22:44, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The sound example is a diphthong