Help talk:IPA/Danish/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 11:15, 2 June 2019

Revision as of 11:31, 2 June 2019

Line 1:

{{talk archive|period=January 2010 to MarchJanuary 20182019}}

== Untitled ==

Line 130:

::: They don't - {{IPA|[ɐ]}} doesn't appear in stressed syllables. I think the only spellings you need to look out for are ''-er(-), -re(-), -rer(-)''. The ''e'' must be there, and the vowel must be unstressed. Again, this may not be a complete explanation, but it's a decent start.

::: You know, I'm starting to question whether {{IPA|[ɐ]}} and {{IPA|[ʌ]}} are different vowels at all (the fact that they're different on a phonemic level is probably indisputable). Are there any minimal pairs? Are there any words in which {{IPA|[ʌ]}} is always unstressed? ''Råstof'' may be one, but I'm not sure whether there isn't a secondary stress on ''-stof''. There are words like ''og'' {{IPA|[ʌ]}} that are often unstressed when you speak in full sentences (as opposed to words in isolation), but that's also true for many other words that don't necessarily contain {{IPA|[ʌ]}} (or {{IPA|[ɐ]}}) at all. [[User:Mr KEBAB|Mr KEBAB]] ([[User talk:Mr KEBAB|talk]]) 22:46, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

== A rant ==

Can someone explain to me why English æ in "hat" is equivalent to Danish a, English ɛ in "bet" is to Danish æ, English ɪ in "kit" to e, and English e(ɪ) to Danish ɛ? What's the point of IPA if each symbol means something completely different in each language? I have no idea about Danish phonology...

''Wait, if you have no idea then why are you commenting?''

I thought the point of this chart was to help people who don't know Danish phonology how to pronounce Danish names on Wikipedia. If it's only for people who already know Danish phonology then it's pointless because, well, why do they need a Help:IPA for Danish page if they know Danish? I know IPA so when I saw a name containing /æ/ I tried to pronounce it with /æ/, but then I went to this page and learned that maybe like "e" in English "bet"... So what's the point of IPA. Maybe use SAMPA... Or add some audio files to at least hear how these sounds sound like... <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/83.26.139.98|83.26.139.98]] ([[User talk:83.26.139.98#top|talk]]) 19:00, 5 March 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Because {{IPA|[a, æ, ɛ, e]}} is a broad transcription of these vowels. A narrow transcription is {{IPA|[æ, ɛ, e, e̝]}}. It's misleading, yes, but that's how reputable sources transcribe them, and we just follow that practice. [[User:Mr KEBAB|Mr KEBAB]] ([[User talk:Mr KEBAB|talk]]) 19:05, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

*In all languages there is some degree of adjustment to the needs of the specific language when using IPA. You should always be aware of that when reading IPA transcriptions, they may be more or less wide/narrow. The problem with Danish is that there are more vowel phonemes than there are vowels in the IPA chart. Therefore some of the vowels are pushed one spot, so to speak, so a vowel may be represented with a symbol intended for a more open vowel. Alternatively you would have to graphically merge two vowels that are phonologically distinct, or come up with some new symbols or some other workaround. --[[User:Schwa dk|Schwa dk]] ([[User talk:Schwa dk|talk]]) 13:31, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

== Plosives ==

{{re|Mr KEBAB}} I sort of have a problem with [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help:IPA_for_Danish&diff=716758983&oldid=712165654 your edit] because, as much as it's probably accurate just in terms of describing how native speakers produce the sounds in Danish, when someone who speaks English reads [[Nikolaj Coster-Waldau]], for example, goes to this page and tries to recreate the sound, '''''g'''uest'' could very well mislead them into thinking ''Nikolaj'' is pronounced like {{IPA|[nɪgolaɪ]}}. Also, we're specifically describing the prototypical sounds on these IPA key pages, so [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help:IPA_for_Danish&diff=788702161&oldid=786415073 removing] the notes just because "Danes sometimes use those sounds" I don't think is really helping either. Bring back the notes or restore ''s'''p'''are'' etc. I don't see how that's "overcomplicating". [[User:Nardog|Nardog]] ([[User talk:Nardog|talk]]) 05:45, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

:{{replyto|Nardog}} {{IPA|/nɪɡoʊlaɪ kɒsdər ˈvældaʊ/}} is a perfectly reasonable approximation of the Danish pronunciation. The problem is that you're deceived by Danish spelling. 'k' in ''Nikolaj'' belongs to the {{IPA|/ɡ/}} phoneme because it's unaspirated, its voicing is irrelevant. Whether you pronounce that word with a voiceless or voiced {{IPA|/ɡ/}} doesn't change anything. BTW, I consider {{IPA|[b̥, d̥, ɡ̊, kʰ, pʰ, tˢ]}} to be an unreasonable pseudo-narrow transcription. They don't differ in anything but aspiration (or affrication in the case of alveolars). We should switch over to {{IPA|[b, d, ɡ, k, p, t]}} as some sources have already done. Diphthongs ending in {{IPA|[-ɪ̯, -ʊ̯]}} should also be simplified to {{IPA|[-j, -w]}} per Grønnum (2005). We can also simplify {{IPA|[ʋ]}} to {{IPA|[v]}} since they're non-contrastive and variable. [[User:Mr KEBAB|Mr KEBAB]] ([[User talk:Mr KEBAB|talk]]) 07:35, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

:We can use [http://ordnet.dk/ddo/artiklernes-opbygning/udtale?set_language=da DDO] for all of these simplifications. [[User:Mr KEBAB|Mr KEBAB]] ([[User talk:Mr KEBAB|talk]]) 10:10, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

::Hmm, on second thought, I'm not sure whether ''Nikolaj'' is phonemically {{IPA|/neɡolaj/}} or {{IPA|/nekolaj/}}. According to [[Danish phonology]], it depends on how it's normally syllabified. If the first syllable is ''Ni-'', the correct analysis is the former one. If it's ''Nik-'', the latter analysis is correct. That is because coda {{IPA|/ɡ/}} is an approximant {{IPA|[j ~ w]}} (depending on the preceding vowel). But that doesn't change anything - phonetically, it is an unaspirated, lenis, voiceless velar plosive. [[User:Mr KEBAB|Mr KEBAB]] ([[User talk:Mr KEBAB|talk]]) 12:45, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

::{{re|Mr KEBAB}} I guess you have a point insofar as there's no contrast between voiced and voiceless unaspirated plosives in Danish, but as far as the notation {{IPA|[b̥, d̥, ɡ̊]}} is concerned, it is by definition declaring that they're voiceless, so it is counterintuitive to list ''ball'' etc. as "equivalent" because whilst they may be devoiced utterance-initially, it is still /b/ phonologically and that's what most English-speaking people perceive it as.

::So you can go ahead and make the change per DDO as far as I'm concerned. [[User:Nardog|Nardog]] ([[User talk:Nardog|talk]]) 13:12, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

:::{{replyto|Nardog}} I'm not denying that. What I have a serious problem with is the inconsistency and confusion that it introduces. Why write {{IPA|[b̥, d̥, ɡ̊, kʰ, pʰ, tˢ]}} if we're transcribing the close-mid front unrounded vowels with {{IPA|[ɛ, ɛː]}}?! It's an effect of a cult-like adherence to the "phonemic transcriptions must be as simple as possible" dogma that obviously also influences phonetic transcriptions. And let's not mix phonetics with phonology - the fact that the main allophones of Danish {{IPA|/b, d, ɡ/}} are voiceless (at least in theory, they can be voiced as well) doesn't mean that the rest of them are (and AFAIK... they're all voiced: {{IPA|[w, ð, j ~ w]}}). That's one of the reasons why they're written {{IPA|/b, d, ɡ/}} and not {{IPA|/p, t, k/}}.

:::Maybe we should change ''closest equivalent'' to ''English approximation''? [[User:Mr KEBAB|Mr KEBAB]] ([[User talk:Mr KEBAB|talk]]) 13:40, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

::::{{re|Mr KEBAB}} That per se doesn't solve the problem. I guess what I'm getting at is, it is weird to describe the prototypical (i.e. underlying) allophone of a phoneme to English speakers with a non-prototypical allophone of an English phoneme because few speakers, native or otherwise, notice the difference in the first place. So long as you're describing unaspirated voiceless plosives, ''spy'', ''sty'', ''sky'', etc. are about the best you could hope for to compare them with because they are at least more persistent to phonetic environment and therefore less "narrow" than ''ball'', ''done'', etc. [[User:Nardog|Nardog]] ([[User talk:Nardog|talk]]) 14:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

:::::{{re|Nardog}} Ok, go ahead and make the change. It's too trivial to debate. [[User:Mr KEBAB|Mr KEBAB]] ([[User talk:Mr KEBAB|talk]]) 17:03, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

::::::{{re|Mr KEBAB}} Thanks. And yes, I've been called out for being fussy my entire life. [[User:Nardog|Nardog]] ([[User talk:Nardog|talk]]) 17:26, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

:::::::{{re|Nardog}} What we (or at least I) didn't consider are words like ''skinnede'' {{IPA|[ˈsɡenð̩ðə]}} which have a mandatory phonetically voiceless onset. Pronouncing ''skinnede'' as {{IPA|[ˈzɡenð̩ðə]}} (with a Russian-like voicing assimilation) does sound ridiculous and non-native, and the examples I chose could lead at least some people to pronouncing it like that. Your examples may be better after all. [[User:Mr KEBAB|Mr KEBAB]] ([[User talk:Mr KEBAB|talk]]) 17:53, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

:The last vowel in ''Nikolaj'' is open central {{IPA|[ɑ]}}. Just so you know, I've just checked Forvo. [[User:Kbb2|Kbb2]] <small>(ex. Mr KEBAB)</small> ([[User talk:Kbb2#top|talk]]) 14:36, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

== Sort ==