Talk:NATO phonetic alphabet

I believe the proper spelling of the phonetic for A is Alfa, not Alpha as listed. The DOD dictionary referenced on the page has it that way, as do numerous other official sites.

Also the proper spelling of the phonetic for J is Juliett, not Juliet as listed. Same reasons.

Lou Sander Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA LSander153@aol.com

The spelling varies. I've added a note. DJ Clayworth 15:01, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)

English words?

I was a bit troubled by the claim that the alphabet consists of English words. English sounding words perhaps, given that this has become so well-known and that film-makers and others are quite unable to resist ther romance of a bit of Zulu-Victor-whatever. But when you look through the words it's difficult to feel that that many of them meet the claim that they are "English words" - quite a few are Greek (Alpha), some are place names abroad (Lima), some are the same in several languages (November, Papa) and so on. Indeed my understanding is that as we moved away from the more English-specific forms for the ease of non-English speakers (Able Baker --> Alpha Bravo) so we tended to replace explictly Englsih words with ones of non-English or at least international origin. I've changed the wording slightlky to reflect this. I hope no-one minds but I thought the previous wording did rather make the article look a little like it thought Alpha was an "English word" and so on. 138.37.188.109 09:34, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

"Alpha" is an english word. English grabs other language's words and has its way with them. All. Night. Long. — Xoder | Talk 14:35, Mar 15, 2004 (UTC)

I don't know if you are being disingenuous for comic effect or if you really do not understand the point I was trying to make. I do understand a tiny bit about ex-foreign words in English but I thought the above essay was quite long enough already. The way the article read previously made it sound like the author thought that the alphabet had lots of words in that are *exclusively* English and would therefore flummox a non-English-first-language-speaker. Like Able and Baker for example. If you do not understand how these differ from Alpha and Bravo, would you like me to try to explain it? All. Night. Long? Sadly I cannot be bothered. 138.37 etc

Symbols ?

Is there a list of standard names for symbols ?

For example, the names

 . Decimal (decimal point)
 . Stop (full stop)
 ? Query (question mark)

seem pretty common around here, but are they internationally ?

The Punctuation articles has one list of names, but I've seen many other names for some of the symbols. Is there a NATO or ISO standard ?

-- DavidCary 04:12, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The only ICAO and FAA entries not listed are for use in numbers: hundred, thousand, and decimal point. For the latter, the ICAO and FAA disagree: the ICAO requires DECIMAL whereas the FAA requires POINT, but the FAA says that it will accept DECIMAL from any aircraft required to use the ICAO alphabet. On the other hand, the only ITU entries not listed are decimal point (DECIMAL) and full stop (STOP). Query or question mark is not mentioned by any organization, nor is any other symbol.
Joe Kress 02:23, Jun 22, 2004 (UTC)

There's a humorous list of punctuation symbols in the Jargon File (one mirror at http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/a/ASCII.html ). -- DavidCary

pronunciation

Could someone clarify the ambiguous pronunciation of some of the numbers?

• "4" - Is this like "flower" without the 'l'; "fower"?
• "8" - "ate" or "ite"
• "9" - shouldn't this be nine-er not nin-er, as the latter is equivalent to "ninner" if each syllable is read separately, as implied by the hyphens?

Thanks.--[[User:HamYoyo|HamYoyo|TALK]] 11:33, Jul 3, 2004 (UTC)

The 'pronunciation' is that given officially by the ICAO, even though it does seem odd. The ICAO recognizes that the words will be pronounced in a wide variety of ways, which explains the specific choice of words. The ICAO includes this note: "The pronunciation of the words in the alphabet as well as numbers may vary according to the language habits of the speakers. In order to eliminate wide variations in pronunciation, posters illustrating the pronunciation desired are available from ICAO." which I've added to the article.
"4" - Yes, FOW in FOW-er presumably rhymes with COW.
"8" - AIT could be prounounced as ATE, but it can also be pronounced as ITE and still be understood.
"9" - NIN-er can be pronounced as either NINE-ER or NINNER.
Just like ATE, denoting a long vowel by a final E is an English rule which would be misunderstood by native Spanish speakers, among others. The pronunciation of Spanish letters is remarkably consistent, and adding a final E would make both ATE and NINE two syllable words (AH-TUH and NEE-NUH, respectively). Likewise, in Spanish, AIT might be AH-EET, which, when spoken fluidly, sounds remarkably close to ATE. But it is not hyphenated, indicating that it is a one syllable word. Adding -er allows a short I in NIN be properly understood, but also prevents NINE from being misunderstood as the German NEIN (English NO).
Joe Kress 19:56, Jul 3, 2004 (UTC)

Right, so the pronunciation guide is the official NATO prescribed one? Smart.--[[User:HamYoyo|HamYoyo|TALK]] 10:45, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)

Yes and no. NATO does not prescribe any alphabet, let alone a pronunciation guide--at least one that I can find after consulting numerous NATO publications. Rather, the pronunciation guide given is official, but it is from the ICAO, not NATO. Because of this, I have considered moving the article (renaming it) as the "ICAO spelling alphabet" or something similar. But the name "NATO phonetic alphabet" seems to be well entrenched, and thus I hesitate. (I know, I'm not being bold.) Of course, using the 'move' tab would automatically create a redirect.
Joe Kress 20:17, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be much that's phonetic about it either.--[[User:HamYoyo|HamYoyo|TALK]] 20:35, Jul 4, 2004 (UTC)

Is there any reason that the number phonetics use a different stress notation to the letter phonetics? ZE RO, FOW ER, SEV EN, NIN ER would look more consistent. Acanon 22:18, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

True or false??

True or false: somebody can explain the reason the pronunciations of the numbers 0-9 vary slightly from the pronunciation in standard English. 66.245.87.154 02:17, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The reason is suprisingly simple: Let's take five and nine. Both of these have very similar sounds, begining with a soft consonant, long "i" stressed, and end with a similar-sounding soft consonant. Therefore, five becomes "fife" and nine becomes "niner", which completely removes this problem. I thought that was in the article at some point? This is also the reason why "oscar" is pronounced "oss KARR", rather than the usual "OSS ker". — Xoder|✆ 16:08, Aug 3, 2004 (UTC)

"Phonetic"?

Why is it called "phonetic"? Obviously as described here it is not a phonetic alphabet (see International Phonetic Alphabet, for example). Michael Hardy 19:32, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It don’t know why, but calling it a "phonetic alphabet" seems to be dominant in the English speaking world. Most government agencies in English speaking nations (including the FAA, DOD, ITU, and ANSI mentioned in the article) as well as the general population do so. The only agencies which don't are the Civil Aviation Authority (of the United Kingdom) which calls it the ICAO word spelling alphabet, and the ICAO itself which calls its own alphabet the Radiotelephony Spelling Alphabet.

However, no agency anywhere says it is from "NATO". I don’t know where it acquired that appellation, but it seems to be dominant among the general population. Even the Jeopardy! television game show referred to it as the "NATO phonetic alphabet".

— Joe Kress 06:25, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)

From the Merriam Webster's Deluxe Dictionary, Tenth Collegiate Edition:

phonetic alphabet noun (1848) 1: a set of symbols (as IPA) used for phonetic transcription 2: any of various systems of identifying letters of the alphabet by means of code words in voice communication

So that would seem to be your answer, Michael: just because "phonetic alphabet" is the right term for an alphabet of symbols representing phonemes, does not mean it is the wrong term for an alphabet of code words representing letters. -- Antaeus Feldspar 20:07, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)