User talk:Sburke - Knowledge

151:(Long story short: improving them would be quite past the point of diminishing returns. The changes would involve: pulling apart the American merger of vs ("father" vs "bother"); listening to pronunciations and noting which syllables are secondary-stressed vs completely unstressed, and turning many vowels into 's accordingly; especially in turning many/most 's into 's (but not all!). Also, some people will argue over syllable boundaries, but English syllable boundaries are inherently arguable anyway. And some people say I use too much, to which my response is, has been, and ever shall be: "cry me a river!") — 1840:

Books has been representing his name.) And in my own collection, I've found even more things I'm razoring out and scanning now. (There's an odd dilemma in disassembling an old book. On the one hand, "Don't touch it!— If I'm careful with it, it can last another fifty years, easily!" On the other hand, "what's the point of a book if you can barely touch the thing?" In any case, Worldcat-etc show that this book is widely held, so it's not like I've got foulpapers of the Codex Seraphinianus and spilling Mountain Dew on them and leaving them out in the rain!) I digress but resume scanning. —

1895:

hundreds of examples if I really must; they are "real", inasmuch as I didn't make them up and they are widely and readily used (as far as the literature is concerned, look up the pronunciation of any such word in a dictionary, and you will see these rules followed); they are historically grounded; they are linguistically grounded; they are systematic; and they provide accessibility to the otherwise daunting task of taking what's on the page off the page and into the real world, by allowing an English speaker actually to be able to say it. —

2250: 823: 2392: 2319: 2109: 21: 746: 675: 2510: 2466: 446: 570:

classical Greek alphabet was defective, as it frequently failed to indicate long α, ι, and υ, and long vowels determine where the stress goes in English, so you need a good dict to compensate.) BTW, if you have any priorities, let me know; I've got other things starting up, and probably will never get through all the articles you tagged. —

108:... Say, a neat project (a class project?) would be for someone to make stub entries for all these people/places that next to nothing is known about, other than their place in a geneology and their citation in Book Of Whatever. It's doable-- the number of these things isn't fourteen, but it isn't four hundred either. Just an idea. — 1434:

classicist pronunciation is essentially Latin accentuation within the confines of English pronunciation. The rules are as follows: The antepenultimate syllable receives the primary stress unless the penultimate syllable is long in the original language (either a long vowel or a long consonant; i.e. Alcib

1433:

pronunciation became less and less intuitive (though never counterintuitive), so now we call it "classicist", because classicists are more likely to be aware of the pronunciations, whereas anyone just picking up a book might be inclined to give it a hyper-foreign pronunciation. In the simplest sense,

1102:

While you're waiting, I should add that people have occasionally published guidelines for this kind of thing, e.g. for actors acting out their translations of Greek tragedies, or for undergraduates; but they differ considerably over the subtler points and no-one really pays the slightest attention to

1376:

The guidelines you speak of have been published for centuries. Their rules are well established in the language, even if many Classicists prefer something closer to what the think the Latin or Greek sounded like, similar to the debate over Church Latin. The fully anglicized pronunciation is the most

569:

together with a Latin or Greek dictionary. I started the list of tagged articles alphabetically, but couldn't do them all because some of these names aren't even in the Latin and Greek dictionaries at Perseus, or at least not in any of the ones which indicate long vowels. (If you're not aware, the

1877:

exists so that, as you said, I haven't just made something up with false connections. But I have done no such thing—in my sphere of experience, these rules are widely (though not unfailingly) understood and accepted. Whether or not a comprehensive pamphlet or book on the matter can be found outside

1858:

benefit - I live close to a record library anyway, and I can look your sources up if you tell me the titles and page numbers. But if the only book you can find to back up your pronunciation system is so ancient you have to cut the pages, that might be a problem. Can't you find a more recent source?

1839:

and have found better (later/alternate) versions of one of my sources, at Google Books. (Google Books is great, but one thing nobody has ever accused them of is careful catalogueing. For one particular author of interest, I've found at least five different and *uncrossreferenced* ways that Google

1368:

The stress placement would, of course, depend on whether the i was long or short. For that all we need is to look him up on Perseus, but I would always recommend indicating vowel length for Latin names on WP, and also Greek names since the Greek alphabet is defective. As for "ji" vs "gi", there are

1072:

There is no such thing as a standardised Classicist pronunciation, and no-one on earth is going to go through all those hundreds of articles you have tagged and make such a pronunciation up for you. We just bumble around like everyone else when we come across a word like "Ogyges", and use whatever

1806:

from the principles you think are maintained by various dictionary entries, then we need multiple reliable source that agree on all that. I still maintain that, except for the most famous names (the sorts of ones that appear in English dictionaries), standardised Anglicised pronunciations have no

1894:

benefit" (I use "my" generally to mean any one individual); as the SYNTH policy says, "Never use a policy in such a way that the net effect will be to stop people from improving an article." These pronunciations are not obsolete, as I showed in a few cited modern sources, but to which I can cite

1946:

ought to have pronunciation guides, when in some cases such guides will be highly debatable. Given this, I may well at some point go through those articles when I have time and remove the tags; and I think future pronunciations should be added on a discretionary basis, as they are attested, but

2331:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

1920:, not just as hundreds of scattered entries in dictionaries between which you feel entitled to join the dots. Can you attest a few such reliable sources with prescriptive force, or not? If not, then this is no foundation on which to build an entire encyclopedia's pronunciation guides. 2404:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

1757:

mulus), but some people prefer to say them short and unstressed. Certain words have gained a strong traditional mispronunciation, like Uranus (which should technically be /ˈjʊrənəs/, not /jʊˈreɪnəs/), which has been mistakenly identified with other words ending in long Latin

1396:

the guidelines you're working from, that have been published for centuries and are well-established? Link me to them please, show me some reliable sources saying they are well-established and not just some guy's idea of how to anglicise things, and tell me how to pronounce

1377:

useful to the reader. They can always choose a pronunciation somewhere between that and the Latin or Greek if they choose. That's why in our articles on astronomical bodies we add "or as in Latin/Greek XXX", to clarify that there isn't just one "correct" pronunciation. —

1775:. For names that are regularly respelled in English (Neptune, Mercury, Cupid over Neptunus, Mercurius, Cupido), which only include well known names, traditional pronunciations of course apply. As for the name "Hyginus" specifically, here is a source on the length of the 1428:

during the Middle English era. Historically, such pronunciation was the only pronunciation (in English), but as the sound rules of English continued to change (and became diluted by extensive borrowing from other languages operating under entirely different rules), the

1415:

In fact, there is such a thing is standard classicist pronunciation, but unfortunately the name is a bit misleading. It's not some pronunciation a bunch of classicists came up with somewhere at some time, and it did not originate with classicists: It is the result of

2218:, "I'm going to have to" and "I have to" might end up differing only in the same way that people say "I would like..." when they mean "I want...", namely: in each case, the extra complexity is not meant to be taken literally-- just a figure of speech. 2121:

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

2077:

on the issue. In my (narrow) botanical education, I had only heard /-eɪ.siː.iː/, and I assumed that it was part of larger patterns with an only minor degree of variation (except when a personal name is involved, at which point my copy of Stearn's

2276:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

849:

1780: 1145:

Sorry to pester, but is there any way you could arrange for the removal of those tags, please? They are rather ugly, and very unlikely to result in any benefit to any of the pages, since no standardised pronunciation exists in most cases.

1369:

various ways that people attempt to approximate the Latin pronunciation, but the assimilated, anglicized pronunciation, what we would expect if Hyginus were a character in Shakespeare, would be with "ji". Then there's the question of

1073:

pronunciation we think will be best communicable to the Classicist we are talking to: as a Classicist, I can assure you of this in the clearest terms. Could you please just undo all those edits and remove those unsightly tags?

2082:

makes pretty clear that it's every man for himself... imagine a "Burkeceae", etc). OK, I've gone and reverted the edits. Thanks for the note, and I'm sorry for the bother (and for the delay in writing you this response).

1704:

eumonia); and the rest is probably intuitive. The rules on the pronunciation of -siV-, -tiV-, and -ciV- differ somewhat between American and British English; traditions differ on whether final -on should be /-ən/ (i.e.

2280:

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

853:

934:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose 2432: 2359: 2149: 992: 987: 1911:

Knowledge works on the basis of reliable sources, not on the basis of your sphere of experience or your extrapolation from the pronunciation of words like Uranus. Giving a prescriptive pronunciation guide is

996: 979: 2416:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 2343:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 2133:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 1117:

A meta-issue, toward a common notation for discussing things... Are you passably conversant in the IPA? I don't want to just presume, since some fields use other/older systems. All the best, -

1916:

improving the article if that pronunciation is essentially arbitrary, or at least has no genuine prescriptive value. If your system had any authority, it would be attested in reliable sources

2553: 1664:

us; this is a Late Latin sound development); double vowels are pronounced separately where they were pronounced separately in their original language, Latin or Greek (i.e. Antin

2548: 1859:

Books that are as old as that tend to be obsolete, and Knowledge shouldn't be adopting pronunciation standards that no-one has adopted since the nineteenth century, you know.

2481: 2220:

I have a vague feeling that "I'm going to have to" and "I'll have to" have some minor differences in tone and immediacy, but maybe just in the ways discussed in the article:

1878:

the rather obvious books that enumerate pronunciations and the few pieces that have been written on common mispronunciations of specific words, that would make it fall under

1019: 983: 1341:

for thinking that Hyginus, when anglicised, is pronounced hi-JAI-nus? I'm a Classicist and I've always pronounced it HAI-ji-nus or HAI-gi-nus depending on what mood I'm in.

143:. There may be a few exceptions to the rule that I've just described, but I think that that pretty much nails it. Note: the pronunciations are not cast in stone. AT ALL. 2522: 525: 1680:

sus); initial consonant clusters whose original pronunciations are foreign to English (gn-, cn-, chth-, ps-, pt-, pn-, etc.) are simplified to their final phoneme (i.e.

493:"Parsons" is pronounced as written :). No-one much understands he fancy schmancy phonetic stuff, of course. Her forename is pronounced syllable by syllable. RayTayAh. 521: 975: 2273: 846: 401: 1131:

I am conversant with the IPA. But that is beside the point: the fact is that there is no standardised pronunciation for these words used by Classicists.

566: 397: 329: 2262: 1762:(like Africanus); and Perseus (which should technically be /ˈpɜrˌs(j)uːs/, not /ˈpɜrsiəs/); you can see how dictionaries have dealt with such issues: 888: 835: 612: 535: 411: 339: 182: 325: 1466:

der; this is an English synthesis of a much older Latin rule); this one's more complicated, but normally (unless tradition dictates otherwise) the

1312:

single standard traditional anglicised pronunciation for many, if not most, of the Greek words you have tagged. Therefore the tags are unhelpful.

198: 1041:

We do not generally put pronunciation in the lead but rather place it in the infobox disease or infobox drug. Therefore removed the tags. Best

2305: 884: 608: 531: 407: 335: 178: 602: 194: 2446: 2373: 959: 598: 105: 369:

Think it would just be in English, while only a very few would know or care too much about authentic ancient Persian pronunciation...

35:. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. 2518: 2502: 2459: 458: 1942:, and are e.g. attested independently in dictionaries. But there is no warrant for tagging Classical articles on the basis that they 2526: 2055: 226: 1969:

Hi guys! Yup, I've been away for a while. But I've made a list of some references like we've been talking about in the meantime: "

274: 250: 222: 2442: 2369: 2030:

pretty much maxed out my abilities with Subcontinent names. But some other folks seem to leap in pretty well with this stuff! —

1054: 955: 1938:

has stopped adding pronunciation tags, at my request. I have nothing against people adding pronunciations to Classical names,

605:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 528:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 404:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 332:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 127:, I have put its pronunciation somewhere: Where Knowledge has a full entry on the item, I put its pronunciation there (e.g., 881:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 461:

whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!

175:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 92:

Okay, I have converted it to IPA and I am putting it in the entries, or: Some things don't have entries, they appear only in

270: 246: 1802:

Yes, but what's to say that you haven't just made that all up? I mean, if what you've said isn't to be considered your own

2490: 1901: 1792: 140: 136: 101: 97: 93: 27: 2425: 2352: 2142: 1769: 1763: 946:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

2437: 2364: 2154: 1058: 951: 1315:

I have said this three times or so, and you have not yet addressed my point: do you not understand what I am saying?

513: 2266: 839: 2486: 1974: 1897: 1788: 1672:

s); double vowels are pronounced as one sound where they were pronounced together in their original language (Z

1334: 1301: 1171: 172: 2514: 873:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

589:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

512:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

388:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

312:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

1263: 859: 770:

again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on

698:

again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on

69:

Before I or another editor starts adding pronunciations to the Book of Mormon people you have tagged, does

1956: 1925: 1864: 1812: 1406: 1346: 1320: 1151: 1136: 1108: 1078: 1027: 656: 1771: 1160:

Really the zeroeth problem is that we're discussing different things, because I poorly expressed myself:

2530: 2413: 2340: 2184: 2130: 2063: 1382: 575: 53:

contact me– otherwise it might be weeks before I notice a message here, and I'll assume that you didn't

1765: 1329:

I also suspect most of these pronunciations contravene sourcing guidelines, and could be removed under

2525:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.

2179:

Hi dear dude Could please tell me what's the difference between "have to" and "gonna have to"? thanks

132: 1239: 803: 730: 594: 1874: 1803: 1050: 947: 389: 1887: 1883: 1879: 1370: 1267: 855: 498: 477: 454: 374: 1528:

ica; this is the modern outcome of a Middle English rule); this rule is further refined in that

1166:

pronunciation; for that purpose, I have flagged a lot of entries over the years, and users like

2400: 2327: 2286: 2163: 2117: 2099: 1952: 1921: 1860: 1808: 1467: 1417: 1402: 1342: 1316: 1305: 1175: 1147: 1132: 1104: 1074: 1023: 923: 914: 904: 646: 628: 551: 427: 355: 313: 298: 128: 2409: 2336: 2180: 2126: 2059: 2016: 1656:

ptus; this is an English synthesis of a Late Latin rule); ch is always pronounced /k/ (i.e.

1378: 1297: 1167: 1162:

What I mean by flagging the entries is that they would benefit from having the conventional

943: 927: 571: 321: 124: 82: 70: 2424:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2351:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 2141:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 1308:

are welcome to disagree with me, that all such pronunciations are total nonsense. There is

1018:, I thought I'd let you know an RFC has been started over reliable sources. Please join in 942:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 453:

Hello Sburke, Eduemoni has given you a shining smiling star! You see, these things promote

2221: 2197: 799: 795: 750: 726: 722: 711:

file. Merely clicking the link to the file will erroneously view the binary as plaintext.

679: 123:

Okay, it's three weeks later, and I think I'm done... In the sense that for every item in

2473: 2421: 2348: 2301: 2138: 2074: 1235: 1042: 939: 931: 149:

as descriptions of what is heard, but they're just fine as instructions of what to say.

1821:

I got some sources on this now. Authoritatives, scanned. ϗ ὀχαλά uploading tonight. —

2542: 2417: 2344: 2257: 2241: 2134: 1330: 1231: 1195: 935: 895: