User talk:Aeusoes1/Archive 2

The following is an archive of debate between various editors of Wikipedia and User:Aeusoes1 regarding the awful things he's done on Wikipedia. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on AE's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Hi fellow IPAian

I've just read the section on IPA on your user page and I sympathize. And I hope you never come across the German wikipedia where nobody would listen to such reasons when I tried to improve the way IPA is represented. Two side-thoughts: I'm not convinced of the use of class="nounderlines" since it's ultimately always a client side decision how the links are displayed. If a browser displays all links with default underline, then there's no way to override this. A possible reason why you have a IPA list to copy-paste might be that you're not using an IPA keyboard. I'm using a SIL IPA keyboard and it's a great aid for IPA input, see http://scripts.sil.org/Input. Of course, you might have plenty of other reasons, but I thought that link could be helpful if you weren't aware of that possibility yet. -- j. 'mach' wust ☞ ☏ 07:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Shibboleth place names

I think Amherst deserves to be on there. For example, unlike several others, it's an important enough fact to be on the actual page (see the first paragraph of Amherst, Massachusetts), and also unlike several others, there's sources to cite for this (which I did, and there are more on the town's page.) If you think there are too many, why not remove bad ones? Endersdouble 04:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Deacon

I see from you talk page that linguistics is among your interests. Therefore the following advice will be useful for you whether you will like it or not. When disputing meanings of words you better consult an explanatory dictionary in the corresponding language, rather than a bilingual dictionary. `'mikkanarxi 16:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Semantic change

Dear friend, I would like to thank you for your editings in this difficult article. As a non-native speaker of English, I sometimes fail to produce a natural writing style and this is obvious when one looks into details. That is why your help is always appreciated and welcome. Dr Moshe 21:46, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Template:Consonants

I'm sorry, but the changes you made to attempt to fix your double-sized row problem result in the headers on the right end of the table being misaligned on my screen. If you want to fix this double-sized row problem without causing problems for anyone else, why not try (a) reducing your browser's text size setting, or (b) increasing your computer's screen resolution, if you use a CRT monitor? I have my screen set to 1280×960. --  Denelson83  20:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

******What??!!****** Me switch back to a less-secure browser? Actually, may I suggest that you switch your browser over to Firefox? That might be the best immediate solution for both of us. --  Denelson83  22:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Voicing diacritics

The voiced symbols ([b], [z]...) are supposed to inherently represent lenis sounds and the voiceless symbols ([t], [s]...) fortis sounds, since those are considered the default combinations. To represent voiced fortis and voiceless lenis sounds (the unusual combinations), one uses the symbol according to its inherent tenseness and a diacritic to alter the voicing, so a voiced fortis sibilant is represented as [s̬] rather than [z]. I'm not inventing this usage; right now I can't remember where I first learned about it, but you can check an academic reference for example here (look on page 6 toward bottom, where it says "A voiceless lenis alveolar plosive [d̥ɑ]" and "A voiced fortis alveolar fricative [s̬ɑ]"). This usage is also mentioned in a casual conversation in the Linguaphiles LiveJournal here ("AFAIK, there isn't a diacritic for tenseness. [d] is inherently lenis; by adding the diacritic for "voiceless" (i.e. circle below), you get a symbol for a voiceless lenis alveolar stop"). Note: The Extended IPA symbols for "strong" and "weak" articulation can be used to explicitly notate tenseness (though AFAIK they are seldom used), so that [s̬] (implicitly) and [z͈] (explicitly) would both indicate a voiced fortis sibilant (although the first would be more appropriate when the sound has some phonological relation to the voiceless fortis [s], as is precisely the case with the Spanish allophone of "s" in desde). Another Extended IPA usage is to indicate partial phonations (such as half-voiced) by using parentheses around the voicing diacritics, but I think this is not supported by Unicode so far. Uaxuctum 04:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

The PDF I referenced above is the script of a cassette recording by a professor of phonetics from the prestigious University College London. I haven't had the opportunity to hear that recording yet, but if he made recordings of "A voiceless lenis alveolar plosive" and of "A voiced fortis alveolar fricative", labelling them clearly as lenis and fortis independently of their voicing, it must be for a reason. Besides, read the article on tenseness. It says that the phonetic [f] pronounced in Ewe has a stronger articulation than the phonetic [f] heard in other languages (even though both are phonemically /f/), and that this is due to Ewe distinguishing bilabial from labiodental fricatives, so that the stronger-than-usual articulation [f͈] of Ewe serves to make the phonemic distinction /ɸ/ vs. /f/ more accoustically perceptible than it would be using the weaker [f] sound heard in other languages (which itself is stronger than the even-weaker sound [v]). I remember when I was learning English; I first tried to pronounce English [v] the way it is usually described, i.e. "a voiced version of [f]". However, I could notice the sound I was getting by merely voicing an [f] was not quite it. I knew there was something I was doing wrong, but it took me some time to realize that English [v] was pronounced "less strongly" than what one gets by merely voicing an [f] (i.e., less "strongly" than a voiced fortis [f̬]). The sounds [v] in English love and [f̬] in Spanish afgano are different. I can perceive that difference; that's why I find it inappropriate to use [v] to represent the voiced fortis allophone in afgano, even though I agree it may be difficult to pinpoint what exactly is the underlying phenomenon that creates that perception (though I suspect it may be VOT). My subjective impression of the phonetic difference is that in [v] the voiced quality is accoustically more salient than the fricativity, while in [f̬] the fricative quality is more salient than the voicing. Uaxuctum 19:22, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I have provided a reference showing that reputable linguists make use of a distinction in tenseness independent of voicing (which contradicts your personal assertion that "in totality the only difference between [v] and [f] is voicing"), and when I have given my own opinions I have marked them as such and tried to reason them. And it's not what "I" describe in Ewe, is what the Wikipedia article on tenseness describes as the phonetic difference between the actual sounds used for the /f/ phoneme in Ewe ([f͈]) and for the /f/ phoneme in other languages ([f]). We won't get anywhere if instead of trying to discuss with arguments and references you just try to discredit me with ad hominem attacks like suggesting that I have "never heard a fully voiced f" (pardon?) or that I'm "guilty of original research" (in any case, representing the voiced allophone as [f̬], which is perfectly standard IPA and a reasonable choice since it represents the voicing of a voiceless [f] by influence from the neighbouring sound, is not original research). Uaxuctum 22:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Basque

Hi, when you cleaned up the "occurrences" section of Voiceless alveolar fricative, you dropped the information that Basque actually phonemically contrasts apical and laminal alveolar fricatives. I don't know any Basque, but maybe it would be good to hunt down a minimal pair and add them both? —Angr 08:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

OK. You might could try at Talk:Basque language too. —Angr 21:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, I just did. No reason you should do all the work! —Angr 21:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Bilabial fricative

Your reverts on my edit were unwarranted. I am going to insert an example for Japanese to appease you. I believe the Spanish example was referring to some specific dialects of European Spanish, whereas it is an approximant in most other dialects. Riverense is taken directly from the article (if you disagree with it, then claim it's unsourced on the Riverense page). Secondly, it is very obvious that you tried to disguise your edits under a template change, when really you were attempting to put an interpretation of IPA. Please be careful next time. Nlsanand 23:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry man, I was not assuming bad faith. I just thought your edit wasn't "demarcated". Anyways, I get that you're trying to keep the stuff condensed on the page. Hope the other edits go well :) Nlsanand 02:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on the Template. Nlsanand 15:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Minority-Majority Edit

Thanks for finding the article on the California English page! I put in the request for a citation and your link to the article is great! Thanks. Your user page is very cool, too. JazzyGroove 04:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Would you take a look at this.

Greetings A+lots of vowels,

I noticed you reverted my spelling changes to the Lingala language article. I disagree with them, but can't override the Wikipedia style guide, >:( but give me time. :)

On another front, I thought I'd pick your linguistic brain for input on the Wiktionary IPA pronunciation Key Talk page. See if my questions and comments at "Excellent resource...and recommended changes" will keep you busy for a bit while I sneak a few changes back into the Lingala page :). I look forward to your feedback. --Dblomgren 19:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I give. What's the difference between square brackets and slashes around IPA symbols? Style? American/British? While you find an answer, I'm going to go look up allophone. --Dblomgren 21:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

New WikiLanguages

I have sent this proposal to the top wiki administarators:

I propose a new major sister project of wikipedia WikiLanguages or WikiLinguistics which specializes in the teaching of all languages. I have looked over the internet and have found some sites which do have several of the major languages giving knowledge of learning them but this wuould be huge and would provide all the information for learning languages such as most of the 250 languages that already have wikipedias. Learning a language is a major infomration source but wikipedia does not have this in detail. I beleive this wikipedia sister project would be developed into an extremwely valuable resoruce not only for achieving knowledge of major languages but also other world languages which are not always readily available to learn. Also many of the existing webistes which do atempt to provide some learning of language often involve a subscription and are not free.

If it is created I would hope that say five years down the line we should have the ultimate language learning resource in the world. If everybody contributes from their respective countris and knowledge of their languages we could see a resource which could allow you to potentially become fluent in hundreds of languages. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 12:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I strongly beleive this is what providing free easily accessible information is what wikipedia is all about and think this is an extrmely valuable component missing from the Wikipedia Foundation. E.g if I wanted to learn Norwegian or Czech or FInnish at the highest possible level or whatever this resource would be there to provide this knowledge. WikiLanguages would be divided into 250 or whatever massive sub projects e.g WikiFrench WikiSpanish WikiNorwegian WikiFinnish WikiDutch WIkiItalian WIkiPortuguese WIkiThai WikiJapanese etc etc dedicated to providing an English encylopedia of languagesErnst Stavro Blofeld 12:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC).

Imagine if this major sister project could incorporate translation technology - imagine the immese benefit for learning but also for tranlsation from foreign wikipedias. This would be a highly useful tool for Wikipedia itself. The site could also incorpate audio technology so the resoruce would not only provide you with the detail to reading and writing a language fluently but provide you with the knoe how to pronouncre and speak a language well. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 12:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I strongly beleive that this is the next step for the Wikipedia Media series. The series attempts to connect the world up entirely providing 'the sum of all human knowedge freely' but I think a key to commuinication is language- a vital part of the project.

Please let me know if you think this is a good idea. I would like to organize a proposal petition with the top wikipedia foundation administrators to decide to start this. WikiLanguages would also provide specializes knowledge of localized dialects or whatever -the ultimate global language resource. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 12:40, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I see you have done a super job on establishing the basics but this would take things to the next level to attempt to provide the knowledge of learning every language fluently. Each section of the WIkiLanguages would have a WIkiFrench or WIkiPortuguese etc sub project each with its own detailed language dictionary and hundreds of pages to attempt to teach the languages fluently. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 13:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi yes what I meant was one seperate Sister project WikiLanguages which would combine teaching 250+languages fluently. Each as I said WIkiFrench WikiSpanish etc wouold be all of the many sub projects of it. I have notcied that Wikiversity and books are attempting this but I believe that to teach 250 languages or whatever is massive and should have a website of its own rather than part of the WIkiversity. At present it is extremely poor in this and I didn't even know it existed with the Wikiversity. There should be one seperate site for languages. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

On site [[1]] this is beginning this but thisa is so poor. E,g look at main page of wikipedia I would prefer it to be like this with the project WikiLanguages in the left corner. I would like a seperate site easily accessible site where you can learn all these languages not jus tthe basic phrases but seriously flunetly with perahps a thosuand odd pages for each language Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Changing consonant article examples

Although I agree that there should be some uniformity in how examples are presented in consonant and vowel articles, I think there may be a better solution than the one you are implementing/advocating. Please see my comments on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Phonetics. CyborgTosser (Only half the battle) 10:38, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Voiced uvular plosive

Hey, I don't speak Somali. I just put a reference into Somali phonology. If you have an example, you put it in...but otherwise leave the example there so someone else can put it in. Otherwise we're needlessly deleting work in progress. I will not revert it for now. Please let me know if you're okay with leaving it there in the hopes someone will insert an example. Thanks! Nlsanand 00:29, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I got one! Nlsanand 00:39, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Shibboleth

I added "Nevada" to the list of geographic names that people mispronounce. I believe I used the correct IPA characters, but even if I didn't, why did you delete it? Gregmc12 03:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmong alphabet table

Maybe I'll catch you while you are still working. I've moved the RPA alphabet to that page and made a few improvements. If you are going to bother setting up a table for it, maybe you can use that version? At any rate, thanks so much for your help and expertise. Nposs 05:25, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

AAVE

Hi, I've noticed your contributions to the AAVE page, and I want to thank you for maintaining a scientific attitude towards this language variety. This article is very close to me, and I want the Wikipedia article to reflect the reality of AAVE, not some media stereotype of Black slang. On that note, I was thinking of putting up a chart of Well's lexical sets for AAVE. I'm trying to get AAVE formatted more like the articles for other varieties of English (There are more AAVE speakers than Australian English ones!), so I'd ideally like to have a phonology chart up, but I don't have the technical knowledge about how to do that (I'm a little bit new at this). If I put up a lexical sets chart, would you put up an IPA chart? Makerowner 05:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

No, I meant that I would make a chart of the lexical sets that Wells invented (Kit, Trap, Dress, etc.) I thought that once I put up the lexical sets, you could put a vowel chart up from that. Makerowner 03:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I'm puzzled by this edit of yours. You added Smitherman's Talkin that Talk, among others. Since our somewhat underinformed fellow editor was (justifiably) moaning about the unexplained references to "Smitherman", I ignored this bibliographical datum and popped into the library today to borrow every book by her that was on the shelf. I found that every Smitherman citation was not from Talkin that Talk but instead from her much earlier and entirely different book Talkin and Testifyin. Thus your edit made the article not more informative or helpful but instead quite misleading. If you were sleepy and put in the information about a single wrong book, OK; but the horrible thought occurs to me that you may have committed the freshman undergraduate gaffe of merely guessing what each reference was about. If you did do that, please remove any other guesswork, and promptly; if (as I hope) you didn't, my apologies for the suggestion. -- Hoary 03:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Wikidudeman and an unnamed user are trying to rename the article 'Ebonics' and I have to admit that I can't find anything on the 'naming conventions' page to stop them. Can you see if there's anything I've missed? Makerowner 03:15, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Makerowner didn't look far. There's enough. I've presented arguments against this goofy proposal to rename the article; you may or may not find my arguments persuasive. -- Hoary 10:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

AGF

I've seen it before. But before accusing me of bullying and going so far as to threaten me, perhaps you need to take a look at WP:AGF (and also of course WP:AAGF), and of course WP:BITE. Cheers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.251.68.181 (talk) 23:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		Awarded for generously giving of time and expertise (especially in the preparation of the new tables on the Romanized Popular Alphabet article). Nposs 05:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Can't help it. I'm just really excited about how they turned out. Nposs 05:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Requesting an official mediation to help resolve the dispute

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/African American Vernacular English, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.Wikidudeman 00:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm currently waiting for the original article to be deleted before I reissue a request for mediation. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 06:32, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation (African American Vernacular English)

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/African American Vernacular English, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.Wikidudeman ^(talk) 03:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

It looks like the other participants aren't willing to go through a mediation to help resolve this dispute. Perhaps you could talk to them and convince them that it's in the best interest of the article.Wikidudeman ^(talk) 03:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Links in headers

One of the often overlooked problems with links in headers is that those with preferences set to edit on clicking a header, are unable to use the links. Rich Farmbrough, 17:05 9 February 2007 (GMT).

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/African American Vernacular English. For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 08:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

Russian language

Stop and look at List of languages by number of native speakers.--219.125.6.248 03:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Please look at List of languages by number of native speakers, understand?--219.125.6.248 03:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I understand that maybe you should take a look at it yourself. Russian is listed as number 8. Directing me to that page only solidifies my position. Please discuss the issue in the article's talk page before making any changes. I'm reverting your edit again and will consider a repetition of your edit to be vandalism. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 03:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

No way. Russian is listed as number 7 and Japanese is listed as number 8. You should look at it very carefully.--219.125.6.248 04:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

You ought to look at it again. There apparantly has been a dispute about the inclusion of Arabic and edit warring on the matter bumps the number of the other languages up or down. And for future reference, it's rarely constructive to not wait for a response before restoring edits your believe are correct. Usually one comment will not convince another editor and you reduce the chance of an edit war by giving the courtesy of waiting. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 04:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Dental Fricatives

Thanks, I have checked all the sources for these languages and they are pretty accurate. I had a source on Amami (a Japonic language ) and it had a dental fricative with its wordlist. I will try to find more. All of the Yukon Athabaskan languages are from the YNLC. azalea_pomp

Image:Two Curve Bell.jpg

Please weigh in on this IfD [2] You seem like a good ration third party to review this thing... futurebird 06:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Help me out here

Go to the last discussion about more pronunciation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tlingit I want your two cents. azalea_pomp

Tabling a discussion

I certainly sympathize with your announcement I move that we table the "social criticism"/Cosby discussion on this talk page. I'm less enamored of the idea that Dude Man might return to my talk page in order to continue banging on about this. Or to your talk page or to anyone else's.

Anyway, there are things to discuss (among sane people who are willing to look inside books, at least). Immediately above this suggestion of yours, we see Makerowner making the surprising remark I think the article should emphasize the popular opinion of AAVE, because this is an important part of its speakers' experience of it. (My emphasis of what he surely can't really want to be emphasized. Mentioned, perhaps?) Makerowner continues reassuringly: It should be made clear, obviously, that linguists reject all these criticisms. Well, it all needs discussion, and you can't discuss something while excluding one person from the discussion, however certain you (and I) might be that he'll contribute nothing of value and merely waste others' time.

Those matters aside, I don't think one can forbid discussion in an article's talk page of one ingredient in that article. If only one person claims it is an ingredient and everybody else disagrees, then (perhaps) OK; but I too must sadly join Makerowner in conceding that ignorance of AAVE has been significant and thus deserves a mention (though a very different kind of mention from that which Dude Man and the "mediator" want). -- Hoary 04:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Gotcha. Without actually bothering to look up the verb "table" in a dictionary, I'll say that I thought it also meant "put on the agenda" or "discuss" -- that it was one of those rare words ("chuffed", "cleave") that can mean one thing and also something that's more or less its opposite. Obviously it didn't mean that here, but perhaps I was too quick to make a different misinterpretation.

Yes, what a waste of time all this has been. -- Hoary 06:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Italics on Non-Latin

Thanks for the info. I had no idea there was a policy, but it makes sense as Cyrillic in italics to many of us is almost a different language. lol I was just going with the format that was already there first due to just getting the info out there and second because I am lazy! lol azalea_pomp

Latin vowels

Hi. I've taken a quick look at Allen, W. Sidney. Vox Latina, and he does claim that long /i:/ had a different quality from short /i/, the latter being more open than the former. Also, long /e:/, /o:/ were more close than short /e/, /o/, according to him. I'm a little suspicious because he doesn't provide many arguments, and kind of waffles over the possibility that this difference might have been a charcateristic of late Latin, rather than classical Latin. But he does mention several ancient grammarians. I'll take a second look at it when I have the time, and reread it more carefully.

I still dislike deeply the use of the symbols /ɪ/ and /ʊ/ for the short vowels, because he never says they were more central than /i/ and /u/ (though he does use the vague and controversial term "lax", which English speaking authors seem so fond of). Then again, he also describes the Latin short "i" as the English "i" in "bit", which has always seemed inaccurate to me... FilipeS 20:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)