466:
434:
196:
504:
445:
403:
538:
161:
452:
451:
444:
227:-oriented dictionaries and pedagogical texts have adopted the IPA, and as a result, it is far less confusing for many people around the world than any alternative. It may be confusing in some aspects to some English speakers, but that is precisely because it is conceived with an international point of view. The sound of
658:
This change balances the need for a clean, readable article while also providing detailed phonetic information for those interested. I welcome feedback on this proposal and am particularly interested in hearing about potential drawbacks or alternative solutions that might preserve both accessibility
323:
Listing multiple national pronunciations after every
Knowledge (XXG) entry word quickly becomes unwieldy, and listing only one leads to accusations of bias. Therefore, we use a system that aims at being pan-dialectal. Of course, if a particular dialect or local pronunciation is relevant to the topic,
704:
IPA is usually considered very hard to learn. The number of symbols alone is a barrier, and TBH even in the linguistics field, it's not that easy: many of the pronunciations can require months of training with tutoring. And if your ears were never trained at a young age, you may never be able to get
674:
I second that petition, the IPA is cryptic and likely only readable by a minor fraction of visitors, while taking a top spot in the article. Though rather than a footnote (which are often cluttered), maybe having it moved to the info box for main pronunciation, and a subsection for the variants?
364:
in accents of
English around the world, and the goal of our diaphonemic system is to cover as many of them as possible. Moreover, where there is no phonological contrast to possibly cause confusion, using a more typographically recognizable letter for a sound represented by another symbol in the
734:). The trouble is that there are some words where respelling doesn't work very well (because English spelling is messy enough that there's no unambiguous way to write a vowel), and of course it doesn't work at all when it's specifically a foreign-language pronunciation that is being presented.
647:
I have observed that the Manual of Style prefers a plain text format of the IPA pronunciation of the subject’s title, which is beneficial for clarity and accessibility, however, those who may not be familiar or knowledgeable about the IPA may find the plain text format be cluttering the page.
689:
I disagree. A single IPA pronunciation is good to have, especially for names and foreign words where the pronunciation is often not obvious. It's also not hard to learn. Therefore it's fine for the first sentence in such cases, though in more complicated ones (such as with several possible
654:
I suggest that all pronunciations—whether they are common, uncommon, or multiple variants—be moved to footnotes. This approach maintains an uncluttered lead section with the detailed IPA information accessible via a footnote for those who seek further clarity.
307:
is simply too inconsistent in regard to its correspondence to pronunciation, and therefore a completely intuitive respelling system is infeasible. This is why our respelling system must be used merely to augment the IPA, not to replace it.
793:
310:
Knowledge (XXG) deals with a vast number of topics from foreign languages, and many of these languages contain sounds that do not exist in
English. In these cases, a respelling would be entirely inadequate. See
708:
If wikipedia was primarily about linguistics, then yes, it would make sense to have IPA up there in a prime spot, otherwise english pronunciation respelling is more practical (it's accessible to all visitors).
49:
651:
Although there is a
Footnote section on the IPA subpage that addresses highly technical and multiple IPA pronunciations, it does not extend to suggesting that main pronunciations also be footnoted.
623:
148:
144:
140:
136:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
112:
108:
557:
152:
761:
586:
84:
312:
34:
783:
723:
While US dictionaries normally don't use IPA, UK dictionaries normally do. So the fraction of visitors who can read it may be greater than you think.
439:
90:
726:
Anyway, we often do have both pronunciation respelling and IPA, and in some cases they're even both relegated to a footnote or the infobox (e.g.
223:
The IPA is the international standard for phonetic transcription, and therefore the
Knowledge (XXG) standard as well. Many non-American and/or
551:
546:
627:
465:
433:
294:
284:
250:
30:
17:
79:
528:
513:
414:
70:
784:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject
Linguistics#RfC: Should we keep delimiting diaphonemic transcriptions with single slashes?
320:
The IPA should be specific to a particular national standard, and the national pronunciations should be listed separately.
224:
664:
644:
I would like to submit a petition regarding the usage of the
International Phonetic Alphabet, abbreviated as the “IPA”.
361:
517:
478:
473:
521:
790:
234:
160:
103:
561:
of
Knowledge (XXG)'s policy and guideline documents is available, offering valuable insights and recommendations.
200:
373:
is arguably the more traditional IPA notation; not only is it used by most if not all dictionaries, but also in
171:
420:
660:
587:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Manual of Style/Lead section#Knowledge (XXG):Manual of Style/Lead section#Pronunciation
739:
384:
370:
354:
350:
175:
60:
787:
772:
743:
718:
699:
684:
668:
631:
617:
602:
481:(MoS) guidelines by addressing inconsistencies, refining language, and integrating guidance effectively.
75:
516:
procedure and is given additional attention, as it closely associated to the
English Knowledge (XXG)
232:
714:
680:
768:
613:
599:
304:
379:
338:
176:
477:, a collaborative effort focused on enhancing clarity, consistency, and cohesiveness across the
710:
676:
608:
I took the liberty of editing your link so that it should go to where you intended it to go. --
239:
in the IPA, and this was chosen from German and several other languages which spell this sound
778:
Notification of RfC: Should we keep delimiting diaphonemic transcriptions with single slashes?
735:
56:
695:
503:
328:
261:
173:
558:
guidance on how to contribute to the development and revision of
Knowledge (XXG) policies
765:
609:
591:
731:
691:
276:
537:
727:
272:
216:
The IPA is gibberish and I can't read it. Why doesn't Knowledge (XXG) use a
545:
For information on Knowledge (XXG)'s approach to the establishment of new
279:
for a few examples. But even this is not without problems; for example,
268:
622:
What gives you the right to edit what I am looking for or what I say?
365:
narrow IPA is totally within the confines of the IPA's principles (
195:
324:
it may be listed in addition to the wider pronunciation, using
396:
185:
177:
25:
536:
502:
782:
I have opened a request for comment to discuss the matter:
383:, which was written entirely in phonetic transcription, ⟨
206:
585:
There is a discussion that may be of your interest at
353:
for the rhotic consonant is inaccurate. It should be
295:
285:
762:Knowledge (XXG):Stress marks in East Slavic words
690:pronunciations), a note may be more appropriate.
413:does not require a rating on Knowledge (XXG)'s
313:Knowledge (XXG):Manual of Style/Pronunciation
8:
531:carefully and exercise caution when editing.
487:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Manual of Style
428:
471:This page falls within the scope of the
249:use a "normal" pronunciation key. It is
760:Please join the work on the content of
624:2603:9001:72F0:83A0:5910:510C:6D8C:8E1A
430:
267:template. See the opening sentences of
387:⟩ was the norm for the English rhotic.
293:, but this could easily be misread as
527:Contributors are urged to review the
7:
524:. Both areas are subjects of debate.
490:Template:WikiProject Manual of Style
402:
400:
362:pronounced in a wide variety of ways
18:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Manual of Style
419:It is of interest to the following
245:For English words, Knowledge (XXG)
33:for discussing improvements to the
24:
756:Stress marks in East Slavic words
251:Help:Pronunciation respelling key
55:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
464:
450:
443:
432:
401:
194:
159:
50:Click here to start a new topic.
474:Knowledge (XXG):Manual of Style
1:
47:Put new text under old text.
35:Manual of Style/Pronunciation
618:21:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
603:19:46, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
809:
669:10:25, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
632:23:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
512:This page falls under the
211:Frequently asked questions
744:09:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
719:08:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
700:08:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
685:07:28, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
544:
510:
459:
427:
377:, the predecessor to the
257:the IPA, enclosed in the
85:Be welcoming to newcomers
794:13:07, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
773:12:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
640:Proposal to Footnote IPA
581:Pronunciation discussion
493:Manual of Style articles
547:policies and guidelines
369:, pp. 27–28). In fact,
315:for further discussion.
541:
507:
360:The English rhotic is
80:avoid personal attacks
540:
522:article titles policy
506:
153:Auto-archiving period
375:Le Maître Phonétique
231:in "yes" is spelled
305:English orthography
283:would be respelled
661:WorldClassChampion
542:
529:awareness criteria
514:contentious topics
508:
415:content assessment
380:Journal of the IPA
253:, and may be used
220:pronunciation key?
91:dispute resolution
52:
659:and readability.
573:
572:
569:
568:
565:
564:
395:
394:
209:
184:
183:
71:Assume good faith
48:
800:
598:
596:
555:. Additionally,
495:
494:
491:
488:
485:
468:
461:
460:
455:
454:
453:
448:
447:
446:
436:
429:
406:
405:
404:
397:
386:
372:
356:
352:
343:
337:
333:
327:
299:
289:
266:
260:
238:
199:
198:
186:
178:
164:
163:
154:
26:
808:
807:
803:
802:
801:
799:
798:
797:
780:
758:
642:
592:
590:
583:
518:Manual of Style
492:
489:
486:
484:Manual of Style
483:
482:
479:Manual of Style
449:
442:
440:Manual of Style
391:
390:
389:
388:
358:
346:
345:
341:
335:
331:
325:
321:
317:
316:
297:
287:
264:
258:
221:
212:
210:
180:
179:
174:
151:
97:
96:
66:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
806:
804:
779:
776:
757:
754:
753:
752:
751:
750:
749:
748:
747:
746:
724:
706:
641:
638:
637:
636:
635:
634:
582:
579:
577:
571:
570:
567:
566:
563:
562:
543:
533:
532:
526:
509:
499:
498:
496:
469:
457:
456:
437:
425:
424:
418:
407:
393:
392:
359:
348:
347:
322:
319:
318:
255:in addition to
222:
215:
214:
213:
193:
192:
191:
189:
182:
181:
172:
170:
169:
166:
165:
99:
98:
95:
94:
87:
82:
73:
67:
65:
64:
53:
44:
43:
40:
39:
38:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
805:
796:
795:
792:
789:
785:
777:
775:
774:
771:
767:
763:
755:
745:
741:
737:
733:
729:
725:
722:
721:
720:
716:
712:
707:
703:
702:
701:
697:
693:
688:
687:
686:
682:
678:
673:
672:
671:
670:
666:
662:
656:
652:
649:
645:
639:
633:
629:
625:
621:
620:
619:
615:
611:
607:
606:
605:
604:
601:
597:
595:
588:
580:
578:
575:
560:
559:
554:
553:
548:
539:
535:
534:
530:
525:
523:
519:
515:
505:
501:
500:
497:
480:
476:
475:
470:
467:
463:
462:
458:
441:
438:
435:
431:
426:
422:
416:
412:
408:
399:
398:
382:
381:
376:
368:
363:
340:
330:
314:
309:
306:
302:
301:
292:
291:
282:
278:
274:
270:
263:
256:
252:
248:
242:
236:
230:
226:
219:
208:
205:
202:
197:
190:
188:
187:
168:
167:
162:
158:
150:
146:
142:
138:
134:
130:
126:
122:
118:
114:
110:
107:
105:
101:
100:
92:
88:
86:
83:
81:
77:
74:
72:
69:
68:
62:
58:
57:Learn to edit
54:
51:
46:
45:
42:
41:
36:
32:
28:
27:
19:
781:
759:
736:Double sharp
657:
653:
650:
646:
643:
593:
589:. Regards,--
584:
576:
574:
556:
550:
511:
472:
421:WikiProjects
411:project page
410:
378:
374:
367:IPA Handbook
366:
280:
254:
246:
244:
240:
228:
217:
203:
156:
102:
29:This is the
705:them right.
552:WP:PROPOSAL
549:, refer to
349:The use of
277:Lepidoptera
728:technetium
520:, and the
766:Altenmann
610:Trovatore
594:Thinker78
339:IPA-endia
281:cum laude
273:Cochineal
93:if needed
76:Be polite
31:talk page
357:instead.
157:180 days
104:Archives
61:get help
329:IPA-all
269:Beijing
262:respell
791:🙈🙉🙊
692:Gawaon
600:(talk)
417:scale.
275:, and
218:normal
769:: -->
409:This
296:koom-
286:kuum-
89:Seek
37:page.
16:<
788:mach
786:. --
770:talk
764:. -
740:talk
732:Łódź
715:talk
711:Wkyx
696:talk
681:talk
677:Wkyx
665:talk
628:talk
614:talk
300:-day
290:-day
247:does
207:edit
201:view
78:and
371:/r/
355:/ɹ/
351:/r/
334:or
298:LOH
288:LOW
225:EFL
742:)
730:,
717:)
698:)
683:)
667:)
630:)
616:)
342:}}
336:{{
332:}}
326:{{
303:.
271:,
265:}}
259:{{
243:.
155::
149:11
147:,
145:10
143:,
139:,
135:,
131:,
127:,
123:,
119:,
115:,
111:,
59:;
738:(
713:(
694:(
679:(
663:(
626:(
612:(
423::
385:r
344:.
241:j
237:/
235:j
233:/
229:y
204:·
141:9
137:8
133:7
129:6
125:5
121:4
117:3
113:2
109:1
106::
63:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
