Talk:International Phonetic Alphabet for English/Archive 3

message: I don't know much about phonetics, but this page lists the phonemse for the British English "aw" sound in "bought" as the exact same as that in American English. Obviously, this sounds are completely different. Shouldn't they be represented with different symbols, then? 24.99.180.16 05:30, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: By tradition, they are written using the same symbols, but the exact quality is different. If you're writing a narrow phonetic transcription of the speech of someone speaking RP (British English) versus someone speaking General American, you would use different symbols perhaps with various diacritics and the like. When you're just doing a phonemic transcription, this is generally considered unnecessary. I think the exact choice of symbols is based on the pronunciations used half a century to a century ago (but I could very well be completely wrong). —Felix the Cassowary (ɑe hɪː jɐ) 05:49, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  A serious mistake 

message: I think that the omission of the schwa from the vowel charts is curious, as is the omission of the rhotacized schwa from the AmE chart.  These certainly qualify as phonemes.  I think, and am looking for feedback on this, that the glottal stop is certainly coming into its own in the English language, and a discussion of it is certainly warranted on this page.  I don't think that it is a phoneme (unless anyone can provide a minimal pair).  In many accents of American English (for extreme example, think Minnesotan), any and every word-final stop is often realized as a glottal stop, or a glottal stop coarticulated with an unreleased stop, not to mention before syllabic /n/.  I also wanted to get an impression from AmE-speaking wikipedians: are the 'long' vowels more typically diphthongs or monophthongs for you?  I think that they are more commonly diphthongs, excepting certain accents (again Minnesotan), but what do I know? ColinKennedy 18:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The charts are labeled "full vowels", which by definition excludes reduced vowels like schwa. The other points you raise are interesting, but can only be added to the page if they are based on citeable sources, not original research. As for my "long" vowels, the first time I looked at spectrograms of my own General American speech I was quite surprised to see how very monophthongal they are. --Angr (tɔk) 18:20, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

text: The rhotacized schwa is mentioned at the bottom of the section on American English. Don't go all the way to the bottom of the page, cuz that's Australian English, which is of course non-rhotic. The section on American English does include the possibility of a roses/Rosa's distinction, though for some reason it has  instead of  as the vowel of roses. --Angr (tɔk) 19:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sounds missing

message: I want someone to transcribe the following phonemically as they would in natural speed, mark the stressed syllables, transcribe in their weak forms and strong forms.
This is one of your new classmates.
Nobody told me what to do.
Some help would be appreciated.
*. User:Angr 14:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tee hee. --Yossarian 30px| 04:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, this is getting addictive... -- THE GREAT GAVINI {T|C|#} 18:35, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request 

message: When I studied phonetics, we differentiated between regular approximate r () and postnuclear retroflex r ().  Peter Ladefoged mentions that in rhoticizing dialects, the r-coloring is produced either by bunching or retroflex.  Obviously, it would still be  for burr, but we were taught to transcribe car as  rather than .  Is this a more narrow transcription than the scope of this page/Wikipedia?  It seems like most transcriptions around WP do not denote the .  Any thoughts? JordeeBec 19:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to know myself which pronunciation is used for RP and GA.  A lot of these symbols don't appear anywhere.  --THE GREAT GAVINI {T|C|#} 08:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both are based on the transcriptions found in various pronouncing dictionaries. A. C. Gimson's gives pretty standard RP, Kenyon and Knott is a good source for GenAm (though somewhat out of date and often needing supplementing by Webster's Third New International, Merriam-Webster's Collegiate, or American Heritage). J. C. Wells's Longman Pronunciation Dictionary gives both RP and a British perception of GenAm. The symbols used here, though, aren't necessarily the same as the ones the dictionaries use, though, because every system has its own idiosyncrasies. User:Angr 09:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Postnuclear r? 

message: There is a discussion to determine a generic, broad application of IPA for international English. If reasonable consensus can be reached, it could become a guideline for writing an IPA pronunciation of English words in wikipedia, without having to worry about the various dialects spoken in different parts of the world. Anyone wanting to comment is welcome at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (pronunciation). −Woodstone 14:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broad IPA for international English 

message: I see there's now a proposal to merge IPA chart for English into this.  Looks like that's the the quick-key page that should be in the Wikipedia: namespace.  And (most of) the links at w:Special:whatlinkshere/International Phonetic Alphabet for English then changed to link there. So my vote is: don't merge but do move. jnestorius(talk) 18:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merger of IPA chart for English

message: I have tagged this because it talks about the American and Australian dialects, but no others - A bit selective don't you think?--HamedogTalk|@ 14:16, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It also talks about RP British English. It isn’t intended to provide a detailed phonology of all Engilsh dialects (for which individual dialect articles would be better suited), but merely to provide a chart for the IPA characters used frequently for English IPA transcriptions. I don’t think the world view tag is appropriate. —Felix the Cassowary 00:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and am removing the tag. I'm also removing the merge tags since no one's discussing it and there doesn't seem to be any support for the mergers. —Angr 05:16, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Worldview

message: I don't understand why people change correct charts to incorrect charts. If you want a phonemic chart and a chart of complete alophones just make it, but please stop deleting valid additions.
The chart seems to lack a labiodental nasal, which I added but is no longer there. Maybe we should creat a chart of // and one of []?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Soyloquequieres (talk • contribs) 06:08, 23 October 2006
: Please see my comment to Hamedog in the section ‘Worldview’ down below above. This page is not intended to provide a detailed phonology of all of or any English dialects, but merely to provide a chart for the IPA characters used frequently for English IPA transcriptions. Therefore it only makes sense for the charts to be of phonemes. Trying to list every single phone used in the three dialects described on this page would get unwieldly very quickly. As the labiodental nasal is not an English phoneme, it should not be included on this page. —Felix the Cassowary 23:06, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  whats the aim of incomplete charts