User talk:Aeusoes1

unstressed /ɜr/

people still use Vista?

Actually, unstressed /ɜr/ does occur. In the -burg of many city names, for example, which are often transcribed w '2ary' stress. I have a difficult time distinguishing it from /ər/, just as I have a hard time distinguishing unstressed /ʌ/ from /ə/, but that might just be my dialect. According to the OED, "Vermont" has the full /ɜr/, though it wouldn't get a 2ary stress mark in MW because it's too close to the stressed syllable. — kwami (talk) 04:27, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. dictionary.com has Pittsburg with /ɜr/ but Vermont with /ər/. If we're encoding for unstressed /ɜr/, I guess we might as well transcribe Vermont with it. It's the same in my dialect, though.

By the way, what operating system do you use? Since I've been gone, I've noticed that you (and, I'm sure others) have changed the ‹chevrons› to ⟨what must be also chevrons⟩, which show up as boxes on my computer whether I use Chrome or IE but show up correctly on Windows 7. My operating system is Windows XP, which, according to the table at right, is still over a third of internet users (and, thereby, probably our readership). If the readability of the newer chevrons depends on operating system, we probably ought not to go with the less readable version, even if it is technically more correct. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 15:37, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I suspect the diff at dict.com might be due to marking full vowels as having 2ary accent, which is done after the 1ary but never immediately before it. One of the side effects of using stress marks for vowel quality.

Win7. Though I'd be surprised if that's the issue. I'd think it would be which fonts you have installed. — kwami (talk) 16:01, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm using Vista and Chrome and have the same issue. In IE and Firefox they do display properly. --JorisvS (talk) 16:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Chrome has horrible language support. It won't display Hindi or Bengali even if I set it as my default language! If we're going to use Chrome as our standard, we'll have to remove almost all Indic script from WP. (Sinhala and Gurmukhi are okay for some reason.) — kwami (talk) 17:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Mine displays those properly. Mine also displays Cherokee characters properly. --JorisvS (talk) 17:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

That's weird. I made a clean install and it wouldn't display most Indic languages. I set Bengali as my default language, and it wouldn't even allow me to return to English, despite the fact that it wouldn't display Bengali, so I just uninstalled it. — kwami (talk) 17:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The issue is still the case that many users won't be able to see some, if we are to be consistent, fairly common characters. Foreign script is a little different because, outside of coverage on the script itself, missing the display of such scripts in English-language text won't impede the legibility of article prose. It's not the same with the chevrons, which are supposed to convey a meaning on par with phonetic brackets and phonemic slashes.

Sorry about the delayed response. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 01:42, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I believe my dialect exhibits [ɞ]

I believe my dialect exhibits [ɞ], and so, long ago, I edited the page for [ɞ] to say that it's found in some American dialects. I believe you removed this, which was the proper course of action seeing as I didn't leave a citation, but I'm still quite sure of this, and so I present to you evidence for my claim. The following recording is of me saying <good> 4 times, the first 2 times being the way I naturally pronounce it, [gɞd], and the second 2 being the more popular [gʊd] for comparison. I then say a full sentence to further exemplify its usage in my speech.

http://chirb.it/eLNs3P

I have also closely analyzed the speech of my close childhood friends and found they exhibit the same shift, meaning it's not an idiolectal feature. I'm from Fairfax Virginia, in case that helps.

So is this recording proper grounds for a citation, or do I have to do more, and if so, what?

YaSBP (talk) 21:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not much for perceiving such subtle distinctions between vowels, which is why a simple recording is insufficient for establishing articulatory characteristics. Think about it this way: if one has to be trained in phonetics (that is, be an expert) to simply corroborate what the source says, then it's not a good citation.

It's also an original research issue that you did the recording yourself. I'm not aware of phonetic studies done on Virginia, but you might want to check out Kurath & McDavid (1961), The Pronunciation of English in the Atlantic States. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 02:04, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Meh, I suspected as much. Sadly, I only study linguistics as a hobby, and so don't have the time or resources to go full out and take x-rays of my mouth, publish books, et cetera. Oh well, at least I know I'm special. YaSBP (talk) 00:11, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

San Francisco meetup at WMF headquarters

Hi Aeusoes1,

I just wanted to give you a heads-up about the next wiki-meetup happening in SF. It'll be located at our very own Wikimedia Foundation offices, and we'd love it if some local editors who are new to the meetup scene came and got some free lunch with us :) Please sign up on the meetup page if you're interested in attending, and I hope to see you soon! Maryana (WMF) (talk) 23:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Tilquiapan Zapotec, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Voice (linguistics) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Infinite loop

Regardless whether it was appropriate to merge the "nontechnical" Spanish pronunciation with Spanish phonology, the latter article still has the link "For a nontechnical introduction to Spanish pronunciation, see Spanish pronunciation" -- which redirects to Spanish phonology. Would you want to delete that link? (Okay to remove this message.) Kotabatubara (talk) 14:41, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh yeah. I forgot about that. We should avoid the infinite loop. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 21:41, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

AAVE troll

A good edit of yours (as always). Did you see this person's edit summary? I've responded. Unless/until I forget, I'll be examining his edits. If I do forget, do please remind me. He now knows what his options are. -- Hoary (talk) 09:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Don't get too angry. That may be what they are looking for. Funny, trolls used to thrive off of the tears of little children. Now it's the lulz. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 14:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. -- Hoary (talk) 15:21, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Diasystem

I'll take a look at it. Benwing (talk) 10:34, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

IPA sounds

What is the difference between the following?:

/t͡s/ and /ts/
/t͡ʃ/ and /tʃ/
/d͡ʒ/ and /dʒ/

Britannic124 (talk) 18:09, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Normally nothing, though some languages make a distinction between an affricate and a stop+fricative cluster. In Russian, the difference manifests in length (so that the affricate takes half as long to pronounce as the cluster). Technically, the former is more correct for affricates, though the latter is often fine. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 18:54, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Please do not move posts

I have moved the section that you moved here back to the talk page. Don't worry about the reply, as I moved that too. If I missed a reply, please feel free to place the reply/replies on the section. Thanks. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 00:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

May I ask what is wrong with my move? The discussion is not about the article, it is about me (this is something one of the editors is having a difficult time with). I was tempted to use {{hat}} but I know that would have been inappropriate because I'm involved. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 00:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

My main reason for this is because I see it as a violation of Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Others' comments, specifically where it says this:

“ Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning, even on your own talk page. Striking text constitutes a change in meaning, and should only be done by the user who wrote it or someone acting at their explicit request. ”

I also did this because an editor expressed concern in #wikipedia-en-help ^connect about what you had done. (see WP:IRC for more info about IRC) I have nothing against you, nor am I biased towards you or the editor who expressed concern.

If you think it should still be on your talk page, feel free to place it back. If you do, however, I would like to see a family-friendly conversation, please. Thanks. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 22:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

You and me both.

If there were no objection, my move would qualify as permissible "refactoring for relevance"; I think I've done enough to express where I think the appropriate place for the discussion is. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 23:47, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Removal of Albanian was a mistake

Dear Aeusoes1, I realized that Albanian was not included in the languages that have dental fricatives, so I proceeded in adding it. But you deleted it immediately. I don know why someone should insist in his ignorance. Sorry, but this does not help improving Wikipedia. Best regards, Aris — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.69.6.89 (talk) 18:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

The issue isn't so much whether Albanian has the sound in question (it clearly does) but whether it is a language with over 10 million speakers with that sound (which is what the sentence in question says). According to our page on Albanian language, there are fewer than 10 million. If that's incorrect, you should take it up in the talk page there. Either way, the article still lists Albanian as having the language in the table. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 21:10, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmong in Merced

Hi! I removed your shortening and merge of History of the Hmong in Merced, California - I made a note at Talk:Hmong_American#Merge_proposal - Your section at Merced,_California#Hmong_community is still there, but I linked the old article as a "main article" - I consider the shortening to have removed important information on the Hmong community in Merced.

I have alerted the Asian American project at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Asian_Americans#History_of_the_Hmong_in_Merced.2C_California WhisperToMe (talk) 18:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Hyphen

May I ask you why did you revert the insertion of the hyphen in a compound modifier? --glossologist (talk) 04:01, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Oops! My bad. I didn't see the hyphen. I've restored it. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 14:35, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Russian alphabet

Between a consonant and a vowel, the main function of Ъ and Ь is namely their separation:

• in words like Чанъань (Russian spelling of Chang'an) there is no palatalization to prevent at all, Ъ just indicates a shifted syllable boundary (чан-ань instead of ча-нань);
• sometimes Ъ does not mean "no palatalization" (after З and С palatalization is optional: съезд, изъять...; after certain foreign prefixes it is obligatory: конъюнкция, дизъюнкция, адъютант...);
• in pairs like налёт/нальёт both Лs are palatalized, the difference is that the second word has Ё pronounced separately from Л(Ь): [lʲ]+[o] vs [lʲ]+[jo] -- as if a whitespace or a hyphen were written between ЛЬ and Ё.

Moreover, modern school teachers' terminology includes expression "разделительные знаки" (separation signs) to refer to Ь and Ъ. Referring to any "hardening" (non-palatalizing) function of Ъ is treated as too archaic, now Ъ is just a separator. -- 68.127.102.86 (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

It's interesting that the method of teaching the softening letters (е ё и ю я) to Russian schoolchildren is to say that they always represent a combination of /j/ and a vowel but that the former element combines with the consonant to produce a soft pronunciation. But this can be confusing to our readers who may not be immersed in the model. It also muddles the presentation of Russian phonology that the soft consonants are separate phonemes in their own right.

I think I get what you're saying, but I'm not sure how to word it clearly in the article. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 00:15, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe just show on examples, like -сё- [sʲo], -съё- [sjo], -сьё-/-сьо- [sʲjo]? Again, "preventing palatalization" is a generally confusing expression, it can easily be interpreted as "[sʲo] becomes [so]"... -- 68.127.102.86 (talk) 05:03, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Swadesh list of Slavic languages

Hello. I see no reason for removal of Macedonian from this table. The words are corrects, the phonetic symbols are correct and it is fully written. I put a lot of effort writing that. Removing contents without any clear and solid reasons is vandalism. As the name suggests, all Slavic languages should be included, otherwise you can rename to Swadesh list of Russian, Bulgarian and Polish. Thanks--MacedonianBoy (talk) 20:07, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry. I should have referred to the talk page discussion on the matter of inclusion. We don't want every Slavic language in that table because that would be too cumbersome. Because Bulgarian is so similar, we can simply point out the differences between Macedonian and Bulgarian within the article's prose. If this is something you have an issue with, I recommend bringing it up in the talk page to see what the community thinks.

Keep in mind that the article in question is more than just the list of words, so if all you care to contribute is just the list, you might want to check out wikt:Appendix:Swadesh lists for Slavic languages. I'll give you a little time to either bring up the issue in the talk page or remove the Macedonian yourself. Otherwise, I'll remove it again. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 16:25, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I think it should not be removed because it is done very well. The transcription, the accent etc. All Slavic languages are similar, very close, and we follow that concept the list should have only one language. I would not say Macedonian and Bulgarian in the list are very close, they have different words for one concept and you cannot point it out easily in a text. Why not having all Slavic languages in the list? As far as I can see, the Appendix is not the same, there is not usage of phonetic symbols. --MacedonianBoy (talk) 17:32, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Like I said, bring it up in the talk page. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 17:39, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I did it. Best--MacedonianBoy (talk) 17:42, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Pre-occlusion

I don't quite follow the "theory of mind" business, but Kwami says he will not object to someone else moving the article to "pre-occlusion". -- Evertype·✆ 08:20, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Are you not familiar with theory of mind? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 13:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

No, and I don't see how it helps. Nor do I have the energy to fight Kwami every time he decides he wants to impose his views of terminology on stable articles. All the interesting content in the relevant article uses the term pre-occlusion, but Kwami bullies his way with specious Googlebooks citations as if numbers meant everything. But I get called shrill. Yay. You know, he's been reported 59 times for his behaviour. Have a read of his talk page. He's no angel. -- Evertype·✆ 23:17, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I've dealt with Kwami enough to see some problems with his behavior, which can be problematic even when I'm siding with him. Recently, I asked for his help in facilitating a discussion on a matter between myself and another editor and his contribution only worked to antagonize the other editor.

Still, if someone wants to make a case of a pattern of behavior worthy of censure, as you allude to, they're going to need a lot of diffs. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 00:46, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

By the way, I took a look through the 59 times Kwami has been mentioned at AN/I. Of the search results, only half are actual reports against him. Of those, about ten of them refer to actual violations. The pattern among those is of making controversial moves or edits with incomplete (or absent) consensus.

While less than 59, it's still a concern, especially since most of these reported violations occurred in 2011. Do you feel like Kwami hasn't learned proper procedure from these AN/I discussions? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 01:05, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Fresno state stuff

Your userpage says you went to Fresno State. Phong Yang, the Fresno State professor who helped make the first Hmong online translator, went there too. I understand you were in a different academic program, but did you ever encounter Professor Yang?

I e-mailed him, telling him about the Hmong Dawb Wikipedia currently under development. I wanted to see if he or the other Hmong faculty at Fresno State are interested in contributing to it. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:30, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

If I did meet Phong Yang, it was very brief. I recall a linguistics colloquium where someone demonstrated what this article transcribes as [dʰ] (as opposed to [dʱ]) and it may have been him. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 04:35, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Alveolar approximant

Hi, you added Westerland and Siegerland here. As far as i know they use the Retroflex approximant, not the Alveolar approximant (difference?). Any idea? Cherubino (talk) 23:35, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

That was based on the sources that User:Lfh provided, one of which is no longer available. Where have you heard that it was retroflex for these varieties? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 23:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

for example here. Cherubino (talk) 01:26, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

That seems more reliable than the source currently used.

With some crude help from Google translate, it seems as though "Im Westerwald wird das r retroflex, mit der Zungenspitze nach hinten, und gerollt gesprochen" translates as "In Westerwald, r is retroflex--with the tip of the tongue towards the back--voiced, and rolled."

Wouldn't that make it a retroflex trill or flap? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 02:12, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

The tip of the tongue is just a bit more behind, sounds more american than english. Rolling doesn't mean trilling or flaping here, it's just air flowing, an approximant. I live near Giessen (east of Westerwald) and pronounce it that way. German people sometimes ask me if i am american just and only because of this letter. It's just a dialect /r/, and not one of the three standard r-s (r ʀ ʁ) in german. The german article de:Mittelhessische_Dialekte#Lautung says that speakers of the dialect sometimes use the Retroflex flap, but i havent found a source for this yet. -- Cherubino (talk) 13:45, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

When it comes to approximants, the difference between retroflex and alveolar is very difficult to parse. Quite a few American speakers don't pronounce the sound as retroflex but as postalveolar with secondary pharyngealization. Feel free to move the example to retroflex approximant, by the way. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 19:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

de:Heinrich J. Dingeldein, Prof of linguistics in near Marburg, states in an interview with Deutsche Welle : "Das ist im Mittelhessischen der Fall, da haben wir die sogenannten retroflexen R-Formen" (thats the case in middlehessian, there we have the socalled retroflex r-forms) -- Cherubino (talk) 20:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC) PS that audiofile seems typical [1] although he uses 2 different /r/

Talk:Diasystem

Stubs I'm not sure how that ended up in my AWB list... I'll have to review why it was generated that way, because it should have only been rated a stub if it was already rated a stub by another project. I'm looking over my edits now. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:06, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks I didn't mean to sound ungrateful. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:06, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Review Looking over the past 1,000 edits, I found a few instances (Talk:Fay Lanphier, Talk:Eric Adjetey Anang, Talk:Elizabeth City State University, Talk:Dmitry Troubetskoy) where there was a Start rating as well as a Stub rating already on the page and a few instances (1, 2, and 3), where I graded it for the first time (and then reverted myself.) I'll refine my rules on AWB and keep on searching. Thanks again. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:34, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Double standard

There is a scandalous gulf between the latitude you allow yourself in making insertions without sufficient research, or sometimes any research, and the minuteness with which you call on me to provide citations. Dale Chock (talk) 16:43, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Examples? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 19:53, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Bengali [χ]

For what it's worth, my worry isn't so much that /k/ [χ], /g/ [ɣ] is hugely implausible as something graphical: I've just seen the letter chi used nonstandardly for the velar fricative before (especially in older material before the IPA was accepted, but that's probably not the case here). 4pq1injbok (talk) 18:24, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

THOUGHT vowel in RP

Hi. Can you see any posibility of changing [ɔː] to [oː] in RP section of the representations of THOUGHT vowels in IPA chart for English dialects? And therefore moving that same stuff from open-mid back rounded vowel to close-mid back rounded vowel? Especially if you consider sourcing it using this: Received Pronunciation#CITEREFRoach2004. I've even seen you saying on some talk page that's exactly this vowel that is there in RP. He also uses /ʌ/ for [ɐ], which (the second one) is already present in that IPA chart, as well as on its vowel page. I'm just a bit annoyed of the old fashioned description of RP. I'd just like to know your opinion, since you're like an admin of phonetics here, so you'd remove it anyway if it wouldn't make sense to you. --Matthiaspl (talk) 23:15, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

It seems that Roach (2004) presents the vowel of THOUGHT/NORTH/FORCE as closer to [ɔː] than [oː], so Roach is not just being conservative in transcription. Wells (1982), which you may have access to, says that RP's changes in the THOUGHT vowel aren't as much in opening to [oː] as they are an increase in rounding and, for some speakers, a more diphthongal pronunciation in final position. This diphthongal pronunciation is even more common in what Wells calls "Near-RP."

There is a degree of variability in RP, though. Maybe other sources argue elsewise. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 00:03, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a closer look at all of this when I'll have time. Thanks. --Matthiaspl (talk) 01:05, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Alveolo-palatal nasal

Hi Ƶ§œš¹,

Could you check this over? There are probably several examples still at palatal nasal which should be moved. — kwami (talk) 21:51, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Alveolo-palatal lateral approximant as well. — kwami (talk) 22:48, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Direction

Hi. Not about IPA. Can you by any chance point me to the Spanish/Lat-am equivalent of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/France & French-related? In ictu oculi (talk) 14:19, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

Hi. When you recently edited Trinidadian English, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Americanism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Stress and vowel reduction in English

Please see Talk:Stress_and_vowel_reduction_in_English#Unreferenced.2FPOV. – Smyth\^talk 01:30, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Message

Hello, i've seen the maps you've uploaded on the talk page of British English and some of them seems very good. Could you please upload some of them on the main article if you don't mind? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timelord3 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I can, though I'd like to get feedback into which ones would be most appropriate. You're welcome to contribute to the discussion there. Don't be shy. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 15:02, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

File:Uvular rhotics in Europe.png

Very nice. But there are some parts of northern Europe you missed. A guttural R also exists as the Northumbrian Burr in parts of northern England, and in the Hiberno-English of northeastern Leinster in Ireland. Uvular R is also a standard feature of the Portuguese language. - Gilgamesh (talk) 05:10, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

The source used didn't cover that area, probably because it was trying to demonstrate an areal feature (the presence of a uvular rhotic in parts of Britain are more likely coincidental than as a result of areal spreading). Still, the map we use doesn't have to be identical, so we can modify it based on additional sourcing. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 12:07, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Kamarupi Prakrit

Yes, I agree with you, and I wasn't satisfied with the way I was replying either. BBhagawati's form is better, I agree, if indented. Chaipau (talk) 20:31, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Furthermore, thanks for indenting the Talk:Etymology_of_Assam and making it more readable. Chaipau (talk) 22:21, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

If you don't mind, can i move Kamrupi dialect to Kamrupi like in case Goalparia. bbhagawati (talk) 13:31, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Chaipau has made the case that it's better to keep Kamrupi as a disambiguation page between Kamarupi Prakrit and Kamrupi dialect. The only way to change this would be if we merged those two articles into one article, which doesn't seem like the right idea. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 14:16, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

As we had an long discussion alongwith sources about dialect status of modern Kamrupi, don't you think its better to change the same to some neutral name (by giving benefit of doubt), keeping old Kamrupi (Kamarupi Prakrit) as an separate article as recommended by you.

bbhagawati (talk) 15:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Armenian – User:Mahtrqerin

User:Mahtrqerin[2] has been adding and readding Armenian to various articles on individual phones (mostly various ejectives) not in concordance with the info we have at Armenian language and Eastern Armenian. A request for citations has been ignored. Maybe you could help out? --JorisvS (talk) 10:35, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that. I'll see what I can find on Armenian. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 13:59, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I've thoroughly sourced Eastern Armenian consonants. There are likely some dialects that have glottalized or ejective pronunciations of the voiceless consonants (check out Hacopian 2003 in JIPA 33[1]), but it's not exactly clear if that's not just some scholarly disagreement. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 18:31, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Not only Eastern and many Western Armenian dialects (except those which historically deglottalised them), but the Standard Modern Eastern Armenian (= literary register) and the Yereven vernacular uses ejectives. Another question is - how 'ejective' are these ejectives? Some undergo deglottalisation in lax speech, others don't. E.g., the ejective [p'] is weakly glottalised or it is often tenuis as it is in many languages with ejectives (e.g., Avar once lost [p'], that is it merged it with the aspirated counterpair, and now it has only aspirated [p], though it has a full series of other ejectives). Moreover, Armenian uses ejectives in all positions - initial, mid and final, and they are characteristic of emphatic or careful speech. See Paul D. Fallon, The Synchronic and Diachronic Phonology of Ejectives. --Mahtrqerin (talk) 11:08, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

The source I mentioned above shows there's some academic dispute about this. Dum-Tragut says that the Yerevan dialect has ejectives but the standard does not. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 14:15, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

And she is right. But SMEA, which is supposed to be based on the Ararat (= Yerevan) dialect and therefore it should use its basic phonological features, is a very drifting accent: it readily uses some recent, Medieval dialectal features (e.g. final devoicing), but is awfully afraid to inherit its apparently basic and characteristic ones (ejectives, creaky-voiced stops and affricates). And this is quite a political issue. Scholars used to see PIE as a parent language that had no ejectives or creakies, so in their opinion, SMEA mustn't have them either in spite of the fact each and every native speaker pronounces them as ejectives and creakies. A very unfair and silly position. But glottalic theory proves PIE did have a series of ejectives which were inherited by Proto-Armenian. Even this theory has nothing to do with the currect state of any language: it doesn't matter whether PIE had ejectives or not, Armenian has them. Imagine, if someone says English RP can't have any glottalisation of final stops nowadays (though it DOES have and glottalisation is becoming more and more common and stronger) because PIE didn't have this feature. Wouldn't this kind of thought sound very surprising? Only the Soviet way of thinking and living could give birth to such strange mentality we, who were so unhappy to be born in the USSR, can't get rid of today.--Mahtrqerin (talk) 18:51, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

But that's not the reasoning behind the dispute whether Armenian has ejectives or not. Nobody is that stupid. Hacopian (2003) points to a handful of phonetic studies that weigh in on the matter, which I think the article Eastern Armenian touches on. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 19:02, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

So, where is the truth for the Wikipedia? The Synchronic and Diachronic Phonology of Ejectives by Paul D. Fallon says Armenian has ejectives and uses them in word-initial, mid- and word-final positions in emphatic or careful speech. Under the term Armenian he sees the SMEA, not the dialects. The question I'd like to ask is the following: will it be considered enough to re-edit the article on Eastern Armenian, providing it with references, to have the right to edit the IPA Armenian examples? If not, why not have Armenian examples with the ejectives I recently made with notes saying that this is the real case of the current language or this is what modern studies on SMEA show ? There is a note of that kind with the uvular voiced and voiceless fricatives in the Eastern Armenian article where we can see they are disputable (some scholars used to consider them velar in spite of their real pronunciation). --Mahtrqerin (talk) 20:54, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I've started a discussion at Talk:Eastern Armenian. Editing the article on this issue seems like something to be done with at least an attempt at discussion. It's always a pain to put work in edits that end up being undone because they're controversial.

To be honest, I was thinking of putting Armenian back into those ejective articles with reference to Dum-Tragut (saying that it's specifically the Yerevan dialect). Feel free to do it yourself, though. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 21:36, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I will do it myself and with great pleasure because this will put an end to my recent attempts to speak for the right of Armenian to be what it really is. The only thing I still don't know how to do is the reference. So, could I ask you or somebody else to provide the examples with references? --Mahtrqerin (talk) 22:36, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Take a look at this edit to see how I added a citation. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 23:01, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I followed you and managed to make just the reference number but failed to go on because the article needed 'References' part. Sorry.--Mahtrqerin (talk) 23:16, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Counterculture article

Perhaps you should hone your writing skills before butchering this article.Apostle12 (talk) 18:02, 12 August 2012 (UTC)