This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Citation from this article:
(And simlarly in article Slovene language, using the same example.)
In my understanding the claimed monosyllable [ʍsi] contradicts the transcriptions [wˈzéːti] and [w̥ˈsɛ̀] in Greenberg (2006:18), in which the IPA symbol for primary stress [ˈ] seems to indicate that there is a syllable that starts immediately after the labial-velar approximant, and the approximant therefore either forms a syllable of its own or is "extrasyllabic," depending on phonological theory. I think we should either cite a better source and elaborate more on Slovene syllable structure, or stop claiming that [ʍsi] is monosyllabic. Love — LiliCharlie ( talk) 16:36, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
In the pronunciation v. orthographic conparison at the end of the article, the word "od" is shown as being pronounced [ɔd]. Why isn't the D devoiced? The following phoneme is /n/, a consonant which I don't think has been described as voiced in the article. Bearsca ( talk) 13:51, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Phonetic alphabet used in SP2001 clearly separates the sound of ⟨v⟩ if preceded by a vowel and followed by a consonant and the sound of it if preceded and followed by a consonant, which are in this article both written as [ w. For the first sound, a marking [u̯] (bilabial u) is used but for the latter one, [w] is used. Unfortunately, I don't have access to Handbook of the IPA, but according to [ this source] (unfortunately in Slovene), [ u is used for transcribing [u̯] and [ w for [w]. The transcription of [w] is thus correct, but that isn't true for [u̯]. However, [ u also isn't completely correct as the sound is actually a semivowel (but the other one is pure sonorant). The writer of the linked source says that the issue has not been yet addressed and he also didn't really come up with a solution. I am not an expert in phonetics, so I don't think I'm eligible to find a solution. However, I do speak Slovene, so I will write some major features of [u̯] that are listed in the linked source and on SP2001:
In the Slovene version of the article, [ uʷ is used. If you can come up with a better representation of the sound, please let me know. Garygo golob ( talk) 12:41, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
As requested, I am also starting the conversation about the recent changes that I made that were reverted. I apologize, I rarely write articles on English Wikipedia and I mostly stick to the Slovene one and usually isn't necessary to first start a debate there. Some of the changes that I made can be found in the rules section of SP2001 (available [ here] (pages 139–143). In it are the following allophones the article is missing:
I did some more research and I found [
this article] (in Slovene) that is more relevant and it includes labiodental plosives and nasal and lateral plosives as well.
I also think that it would be better if we at least note that some research shows that ⟨r⟩ is pronounced as /
r/, but that most speakers reject this pronunciation and transcription as /
ɾ/ is favoured.
Doremo, I would also like you to cite the reference where you found this, because I cannot find such an experiment anywhere and I could use it on Slovene Wikipedia. Thank You.
I again apologize for my impatience.
Garygo golob (
talk) 15:45, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Garygo golob, following your edit yesterday there are two Jurgec (2007) sources in the article bibliography. I have edited to make them (2007a) and (2007b); could you go through the article and choose the appropriate source for each of the short footnotes (the {{ harvcoltxt}} templates)? There's a short explanation of what to do here. Thanks, Wham2001 ( talk) 18:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Which of these new changes should be included in the help page Help:IPA/Slovene? I have left a more thorough opinion on its talk page, however there are one more thing that I forgot to mention. It would be great to also add geminated consonants, but there is a lot of them and they can also be pronounced as non-geminated consonants. Therefore, I suggest these are transcribed as non-geminated counterparts to keep it simple. Garygo golob ( talk) 07:18, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Citation from this article:
(And simlarly in article Slovene language, using the same example.)
In my understanding the claimed monosyllable [ʍsi] contradicts the transcriptions [wˈzéːti] and [w̥ˈsɛ̀] in Greenberg (2006:18), in which the IPA symbol for primary stress [ˈ] seems to indicate that there is a syllable that starts immediately after the labial-velar approximant, and the approximant therefore either forms a syllable of its own or is "extrasyllabic," depending on phonological theory. I think we should either cite a better source and elaborate more on Slovene syllable structure, or stop claiming that [ʍsi] is monosyllabic. Love — LiliCharlie ( talk) 16:36, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
In the pronunciation v. orthographic conparison at the end of the article, the word "od" is shown as being pronounced [ɔd]. Why isn't the D devoiced? The following phoneme is /n/, a consonant which I don't think has been described as voiced in the article. Bearsca ( talk) 13:51, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Phonetic alphabet used in SP2001 clearly separates the sound of ⟨v⟩ if preceded by a vowel and followed by a consonant and the sound of it if preceded and followed by a consonant, which are in this article both written as [ w. For the first sound, a marking [u̯] (bilabial u) is used but for the latter one, [w] is used. Unfortunately, I don't have access to Handbook of the IPA, but according to [ this source] (unfortunately in Slovene), [ u is used for transcribing [u̯] and [ w for [w]. The transcription of [w] is thus correct, but that isn't true for [u̯]. However, [ u also isn't completely correct as the sound is actually a semivowel (but the other one is pure sonorant). The writer of the linked source says that the issue has not been yet addressed and he also didn't really come up with a solution. I am not an expert in phonetics, so I don't think I'm eligible to find a solution. However, I do speak Slovene, so I will write some major features of [u̯] that are listed in the linked source and on SP2001:
In the Slovene version of the article, [ uʷ is used. If you can come up with a better representation of the sound, please let me know. Garygo golob ( talk) 12:41, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
As requested, I am also starting the conversation about the recent changes that I made that were reverted. I apologize, I rarely write articles on English Wikipedia and I mostly stick to the Slovene one and usually isn't necessary to first start a debate there. Some of the changes that I made can be found in the rules section of SP2001 (available [ here] (pages 139–143). In it are the following allophones the article is missing:
I did some more research and I found [
this article] (in Slovene) that is more relevant and it includes labiodental plosives and nasal and lateral plosives as well.
I also think that it would be better if we at least note that some research shows that ⟨r⟩ is pronounced as /
r/, but that most speakers reject this pronunciation and transcription as /
ɾ/ is favoured.
Doremo, I would also like you to cite the reference where you found this, because I cannot find such an experiment anywhere and I could use it on Slovene Wikipedia. Thank You.
I again apologize for my impatience.
Garygo golob (
talk) 15:45, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Garygo golob, following your edit yesterday there are two Jurgec (2007) sources in the article bibliography. I have edited to make them (2007a) and (2007b); could you go through the article and choose the appropriate source for each of the short footnotes (the {{ harvcoltxt}} templates)? There's a short explanation of what to do here. Thanks, Wham2001 ( talk) 18:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Which of these new changes should be included in the help page Help:IPA/Slovene? I have left a more thorough opinion on its talk page, however there are one more thing that I forgot to mention. It would be great to also add geminated consonants, but there is a lot of them and they can also be pronounced as non-geminated consonants. Therefore, I suggest these are transcribed as non-geminated counterparts to keep it simple. Garygo golob ( talk) 07:18, 4 July 2022 (UTC)