Talk:International Phonetic Alphabet/Archive 7

message: I've just finished rewritting the second paragraph of the usage section (diff). I tried to make it readable, but I'd appreciate a second opinion. Anybody wanna bite? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 23:20, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyedit needed 

message: Is there a specific order for coarticulation and suprasegmental characters? Especially in Caucasian languages I often see different ways to write ejective labialized plosives, which character comes first, [kʼʷ] or [kʷʼ]? I often see the latter, but this makes less sense to me. What if pharyngealization occurs as well... [kʼʷˤa], [kʼˤʷa], [kʷʼˤa], [kʷˤʼa], [kˤʷʼa] or [kˤʼʷa]? And I often see (especially in Avar) transcriptions like [ʦːʼ], shouldn't this be [ʦʼː], as it represents a lengthened ejective consonant and not an ejectivized long consonant? So, is there a specific order? — N-true 02:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of coarticulation marks 

message: The begining of the article focuses too much on English without providing links to what is mentioned in the charts section at the end:
http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/IPA/fullchart.html
--Michelle
17 April 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.199.247.232 (talk) 17:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong focus? 

message: Hi, recent edits have been very good, IMHO. That got me wondering; why isn't the IPA article already a featured article? ;) What do you think needs to be done? --Kjoonlee 15:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Road to featured status 

message: Overall, an excellent article.  Just a few points caught my eye:
*Description  "the IPA does not use letters whose sound value is context-dependent, such as c in English (and most other European languages)."  This seems to imply that IPA doesn't use c: that's not what you meant, I know, but it could easily be interpreted that way.
*Letterforms and Symbols and sounds  "The symbols chosen for the IPA are meant to harmonize with the Latin alphabet."  This sentence, or something like it, is repeated three times.
*Use in dictionaries Why not mention the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary by J.C. Wells and Sheila Dallas?  John Wells is one of the foremost living phoneticians & the inventor of SAMPA: don't you think he deserves a mention here? --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 11:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead and make the changes. −Woodstone 12:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I've made a start! --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 15:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 

message: I'll be soon giving the references a thorough revision. As useful as the "quote" parameter is, mixing quotes and full references in footnotes is at best confusing, at worst illegible. Once I'm done with it, I'll try to make a more thorough analysis And post the result at Talk:International Phonetic Alphabet/Comments (at least, if they are long enough to warrant it). Cheers. Circeus 21:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind the analysis thing. Besides the concerns I voiced in the FAC, It goes more fluently than it looked.Circeus 04:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References and commentary 

message: Because this is a cumbersome article, I have asked for a REVIEW of its status.Kdammers 11:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to ask what you mean by "cumbersome", but see that you have already commented here. --Jtir 12:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal from good article category requested 

message: Hi, I'll maintain a short TODO list here, for the time being. Please feel free to cross items out that have been completed.
*Increased wikification of latter half
*Citations, where needed
*Turn redlinks into articles, or unlink/delete if non-notable
Cheers, --Kjoonlee 02:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can cite the appropriate part of Handook of the IPA where it is needed. Just let me know. The Phonotypic alphabet, which is repeatedly mentioned as a predecessor of the IPA, does indeed exist, but I cannot find any paper or electronic resources about it. As it was, I only found one or two internet sites about the Romic alphabet when I started the article, and no books about it at all. Specifically, which sections need work and what information needs to be added? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 15:14, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Re: Handbook: Please do! Thank you very much. :) There are two sections near the bottom that don't have any references cited. --Kjoonlee 22:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, tomorrow, about 18 hours from now, I can do it. I may get one or two in tonight. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 02:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

text: By the way, do you need quotes from the handbook for anything? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 02:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TODO for FA 

message: The link to Rosetta Stone (software) was removed here. I was going to restore it, but the "verifiable source" wants me to pay. Further, the wording is so imprecise that I can't tell what the intent is. Could someone take a closer look?
The link was added here and tweaked here, so that would count as two editors who want the link. --Jtir 18:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like a joke or a subtle advertising attempt (or maybe just an honest mistake). In any case, good call. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 18:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to go with honest mistake.  is relatively new and doesn't seem to have a history of adding links to articles on commercial products. The tweaking is the sort of automatic tidying up anyone would do without necessarily endorsing the link. —Angr 20:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess it's a classic example of WP:AGF then. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 20:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  link to [[Rosetta Stone (software)]] was removed 

message: Now that ébauche and international have been corrected, isn't it time to get IPA itself right?  The image in the infobox at the top of the article simply has .  There should surely be at least a primary stress mark there—& probably a secondary one too (ie ). --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 17:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Image:IPA in IPA stress.svg. Hope it's accurate :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:33, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks fine to me!  What do others think? --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 17:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't mark stress at all. First of all, with [] notation we don't need to include everything that's phonemic. Secondly, all three syllables are stressed, as is common in acronyms. If we do add stress, we can show it as three stressed 'words' (()) or as a single word, without spaces (). I think either of those might provoke argument, though. Maybe best just to leave it as the broad transcription that it is now. kwami 20:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You may be right—though a "broad" transcription surely wouldn't mark the p as aspirated ( [pʰ] ), would it? --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 14:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can pick & choose which features to show. Often you'll see [c] for an affricate, for example, even when other affricates are overt. Yeah, it does seem odd to leave out something that is phonemic (stress) when including something that is not (aspiration), but I've seen that often enough, such as showing allophonic detail in tonal African languages without marking tone. kwami 17:40, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stress marks in "IPA" itself? 

message: By a vote of 4-1, this article shall keep Good Article status. Votes were 2 "Strong Keep", 2 "Keep", 1 "Weak Delist". Although it did survive review, it is recommended that the contributing editors to this article view the archived discussion and address mentioned concerns. 
Regards, LaraLoveT/C 07:07, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:GA/R]] Results

message: IPA pronunciations are being added to lots of articles, is there a source that can be cited for them? -Ravedave 22:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt there's one single source that can be cited for all of them. You'd have to look for each one separately. Are there any specific ones you're skeptical of? —Angr 04:47, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well there has been a glacially moving edit war over Minnesota's pronuciation. Is there any reason not to source every single one? Would it be original research to say that Wisconson is pronounced ? -Ravedave 05:10, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  No prob, it was just a Dutch learner of English with a distorted perception of English phonology.  —JackLumber /tɔk/ 13:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

text: A dictionary that uses IPA would be an excellent source. Minnesota is . --Jtir 15:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I have re-annotated two exlinks to say that they are with machine pronunciation of IPA symbols. I am not satified with calling these machine pronunciations. Alternatives?  
--Jtir 19:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an exlinks subsection called Sound files. That works for me. --Jtir 23:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  alternatives to saying ''machine pronunciation'' in exlink annotations? 

message: The Manual of Style says:
"Pronunciation in Wikipedia is indicated using the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). For ease of understanding, fairly broad IPA transcriptions are usually used."
Can someone tell me what "fairly broad" means in this context? It should be explained or removed in the MOS. Tony 13:29, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh... I would gloss "fairly broad" here as "similar to English, rather than actually correct."  -- Visviva 13:56, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that, although Fv provided a precise link, which I've just included in the MOS here. BTW, the person who removed my previous query about the same matter, apparently because s/he considered it irrelevant to this page, should, frankly, get a life. Tony 14:03, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, article Talk pages are generally meant for queries regarding the article and not its subject. I reinstated your query because, frankly, the editors of this page probably have the necessary expertise to answer it, and I don't think you'd get that anywhere else on WP :) I'm glad the link I provided was accurate enough. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Query re MOS 

message: Should // vs [] be added to the IPA chart for English? Also when [] is used doesn't that mean the accent used should be described as well? -Ravedave 02:55, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:   // vs [] 

message: My computer it displaying the tie-bar too far to the right. What font shows it correctly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.129.182.66 (talk • contribs) 
:I haven't looked at tie bars, but personally I think Doulos SIL is the most advanced when it comes to combining characters. --Kjoonlee 18:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The tie bar? 

message: Shouldn't there be a criticism section? IPA ia at least a little controversial; I've come across plenty of IPA-haters on many WP discussion pages. I personally find it fairly useless when using WP as a quick look-up reference; my eyes just fly past those odd squigglies.Armandtanzarian 19:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A criticism section should certainly be added if it is based on published, reliable sources, preferably by professional linguists. Laymen saying "I don't like IPA because I've never learned to read it" (which is the only anti-IPA sentiment I've ever encountered at Wikiepdia) is not actually a valid criticism. —Angr 19:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So this is NOT a talk page? I post a remark and it's simply removed? Or perhaps it's a private club and I failed to notice the sign.Arglebargler 23:09, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is. Read the history and User:Angr's comment to his removal! Your comment had nothing to do with this article, but with the Wikipedia guidelines. He gave a better link, you should post your comment there. — N-true 02:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Laymen saying "I don't like IPA because I've never learned to read it" (which is the only anti-IPA sentiment I've ever encountered at Wikiepdia) is not actually a valid criticism." This represents a POV and the POV is that Wikipedia exists for the benefit of those who write it, not for the benefit of those who read it. IPA is incomprehensible to virtually every human being on Earth. It's perfectly appropriate to include IPA pronunciations, but not to the exclusion of systems which might be useful to someone other than a linguist. Assuming that schoolchildren use Wikipedia as an aid to study, do we expect them to learn IPA? Ninquerinquar 23:27, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This page is for discussing improvements to Wikipedia's article on the IPA, not for discussing Wikipedia's internal use of the IPA. The anti-IPA sentiment among some Wikipedia editors--which is not based on valid criticisms of the alphabet as a system, but rather on ignorance of the alphabet itself--is not notable enough to be mentioned in this article. —Angr 04:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  If you have a complaint about the use of IPA in Wikipedia, this is not the place to make it.  And all this "I don't understand IPA, so it's elitist" is a very poor argument indeed. garik 10:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism?