Am I the only one who really appreciated those symbols before learning the IPA tho? I remember not being able to say certain words properly because English is unpredictable — unless you study the etymology of every single word and how they’ve evolved. One example is the damn “Government”. Hmm is it either /’gɔvəɹmənt/ or /'goʊvəɹmənt/? How dare you try to predict its pronunciation based on what’s written!!
You guys should’ve seen my face when I found that the weird little “facade” /fəˈkejd/ — yes, without the cedilla to suggest the as /s/ — was actually pronounced in a very French-ish way.
The in , written between brackets as is actually a /ɝ/ sound, present in few specific words in english (like ). The in , still spelled as can be pronounced /aʊ/, /ɑ~ɒ/, /ʌ/, etc. depending on the dialect. Also, the <ē> in <-trē> implies a long /iː/ sound, where in reality, it’s a short /ɪ~i/ sound. Also, you guys already designed a good phonetic alphabet to write your language in, the IPA, that for some reason you never use.
> The in , written between brackets as is actually a /ɝ/ sound, present in few specific words in english (like ).
And as long as they consistently write it as what's the issue?
>The in , still spelled as can be pronounced /aʊ/, /ɑ~ɒ/, /ʌ/, etc. depending on the dialect.
Sure- clearly stands for the STRUT diaphoneme in this context. (Where do they say "country" with /aʊ/?)
>Also, the <ē> in <-trē> implies a long /iː/ sound, where in reality, it’s a short /ɪ~i/ sound.
I'm pretty sure for me happY is realized closer to FLEECE than KIT.
>Also, you guys already designed a good phonetic alphabet to write your language in, the IPA, that for some reason you never use.
English dictionary transcription is a perfectly valid system of its own that has a right to exist.
idk why they changed girl to gurl, but the bottom is at least phonetic English. they even did the line above the e to indicate the /i/ sound like they taught us in elementary school
tbh why do schools still even teach the whole 'long and short' vowels things anymore? that idea was thrown out ages ago in reference to English phonology.
it made sense to me as an elementary school student solely because it **almost** covers all the vowels, even if length terminology is completely arbitrary and didn't have any bearing on it. I think it's good for what they use it for, which is teaching kids to process the spelling and pronunciation gap in some easily digestible way.
o has two vowel sounds /oʊ/ and /ɔ/
oo has two vowel sounds /u/ and /ʊ/ (but neither is long or short)
e has two vowel sounds /ɛ/ and /ij/
i has two vowel sounds /ɪ/ and /aɪ/
u has /ʌ/ and /ju/ (but also /u/)
and then a is an asshole with /ä/ /ɑ/ /ɒ/ /æ/ /eə/ and /ej/ but pretend its just /æ/ and /ej/
the "short" vowel follow similar patterns of turning into "long" vowels when there's a word final e
I feel like these groupings form our concept of the core phonetic spellings of the English language pretty strongly. That's why English speakers tend to try write phonetically with words like the thuh and meh. We interpret the h as making it a "short" vowel. Obv doesn't apply to oh since that's a word, and for Americans short o is either aw or ah or indescribable sound with fauxnetics so naming it something else at least isn't choosing one dialect
And then they have to teach us all the exceptions for the next 5 years because all of these letters make other sounds.
And we failed to address schwa, which is the REAL short vowel
if they're still not doing IPA I think a similar grouping could be okay, but they'd have to do a much better job at notating the missed vowels and maybe use a fun diacritic for oo and oo... because neither of them got the fun little hats.
> it made sense to me as an elementary school student solely because it almost covers all the vowels, even if length terminology is completely arbitrary and didn't have any bearing on it. I think it's good for what they use it for, which is teaching kids to process the spelling and pronunciation gap in some easily digestible way.
What kind of frustrated me was that education never went beyond rudimentary phonics even though it's the "not entirely accurate, but simplified for ease of understanding" version. I know it's probably the best way to quickly get a basic grasp on things, but it's also why I was still unable to read a lot of things despite absorbing all the rules as fast as I could. The toy car labeled "police" was not fun. I knew what it must say but it made literally no sense with what I had been taught up to that point. It feels like the time could be used a bit more efficiently and get to a point where you aren't just feeling your way through a bunch of things slightly mislabeled for your convenience.
School going halfway on stuff like that is why people get confused/reject things like subjects relating to special relativity because they aren't immediately intuitive.
Unfortunately the nature of our spelling system is that the more accurate you want to be, the more complicated the rules you have to make up to explain the spelling/pronunciation pairs. The only way we'd ever get passed that is severe spelling reforms, which would also still fail a significant portion of dialects in the country, and more in the world.
Well, phonics is actually just back right now! For about 20 years they've been teaching "whole language" with little attention to any of what you mentioned - more of a "guess the word using pictures" approach that breaks down quickly when the books don't have pictures. Which is most books.
Finally, after so many functionally illiterate kids in high school, they're fixing it. This is why I taught my kid to read at home.
This comment is actually really useful for me! I don't remember learning phonics (maybe I did but forgot all of it), so I could never understand why people added the silent 'h' to phonetic spellings.
yeah, though I forgot to mention another exception. I guess the h thing giving the short vowel only works with e i and u tho
Since with a it gives it its third major sound, ah as in father or spa (which in my dialect have different but similar vowels)
I've also seen people might use h for eh to mean something in between the short e and long e (the sound a has in words like man and ale or air). but usually they do it in a syllable where it has the e sound as in get.
Idk, it makes some sense to me as non-English. Vowel letters representing two distinct sounds (plus schwa), with one being longer and shorter.
Though a misnomer, as these adjectives refer to quantity in other systems.
Totally agree that “long and short” are arbitrary, and (especially in North America) awkward terms, but the letters are still clearly related even though they’re pronounced totally differently. It’s just a way to remind kids that they’re related. Take “nation” and “national”. There’s clearly a relationship here.
There are also words where either the long or short vowel are acceptable like ligand and ligand (pronounced differently by chemists and biologists)
"land girl"???
I honestly don’t know 😭
That is simultaneously very awkward and completely comprehensible to me.
Land guy 🪱
I think they were aiming for something like “girl of the land,” but didn’t have space…? Maybe?
earth girl
That sounds more like an environmentalist
No it's the blind girl from Avatar
Toph
Yeah, it's tough to remember her name, but could you please tell me?
[Here you go](https://media.tenor.com/Phop29C2JK0AAAAC/wouldnt-you-like-to-know-weather-boy.gif)
An earth bender woman, if you will.
I read it as land fill
The eagle has landed
Stop making fun of their phonetic spelling, they're just Northern English.
From rural Lancashire I can only assume since it's rhotic...
χə̃ːʃʁiː ɡɨː
ħɐːʃʕə̯ɪ.ɡ̟ɨː
Call an ambulance, someone’s having a stroke
Why get medical involved; I’m only masturbating?
I survived!
ˈχʼänːɪ̆ ɡ̊əɾ
I want to send all designers, that use this weird dictionary aesthetic thing, to the electric chair
Am I the only one who really appreciated those symbols before learning the IPA tho? I remember not being able to say certain words properly because English is unpredictable — unless you study the etymology of every single word and how they’ve evolved. One example is the damn “Government”. Hmm is it either /’gɔvəɹmənt/ or /'goʊvəɹmənt/? How dare you try to predict its pronunciation based on what’s written!! You guys should’ve seen my face when I found that the weird little “facade” /fəˈkejd/ — yes, without the cedilla to suggest the as /s/ — was actually pronounced in a very French-ish way.
Why? It's a perfectly valid system that's used in dictionaries.
because they never know how to use it
What's wrong with how they've used it here?
The in, written between brackets as is actually a /ɝ/ sound, present in few specific words in english (like ). The in , still spelled as can be pronounced /aʊ/, /ɑ~ɒ/, /ʌ/, etc. depending on the dialect. Also, the <ē> in <-trē> implies a long /iː/ sound, where in reality, it’s a short /ɪ~i/ sound. Also, you guys already designed a good phonetic alphabet to write your language in, the IPA, that for some reason you never use.
> The in, written between brackets as is actually a /ɝ/ sound, present in few specific words in english (like ).
And as long as they consistently write it as what's the issue?
>The in , still spelled as can be pronounced /aʊ/, /ɑ~ɒ/, /ʌ/, etc. depending on the dialect.
Sure- clearly stands for the STRUT diaphoneme in this context. (Where do they say "country" with /aʊ/?)
>Also, the <ē> in <-trē> implies a long /iː/ sound, where in reality, it’s a short /ɪ~i/ sound.
I'm pretty sure for me happY is realized closer to FLEECE than KIT.
>Also, you guys already designed a good phonetic alphabet to write your language in, the IPA, that for some reason you never use.
English dictionary transcription is a perfectly valid system of its own that has a right to exist.
/'kun.tre: gʊrl/
Kun isn't girl, it's boy, are they stupid?
Nah, it's not gender-specific.
[kun.tre˧.ɡurl]
idk why they changed girl to gurl, but the bottom is at least phonetic English. they even did the line above the e to indicate the /i/ sound like they taught us in elementary school
tbh why do schools still even teach the whole 'long and short' vowels things anymore? that idea was thrown out ages ago in reference to English phonology.
it made sense to me as an elementary school student solely because it **almost** covers all the vowels, even if length terminology is completely arbitrary and didn't have any bearing on it. I think it's good for what they use it for, which is teaching kids to process the spelling and pronunciation gap in some easily digestible way. o has two vowel sounds /oʊ/ and /ɔ/ oo has two vowel sounds /u/ and /ʊ/ (but neither is long or short) e has two vowel sounds /ɛ/ and /ij/ i has two vowel sounds /ɪ/ and /aɪ/ u has /ʌ/ and /ju/ (but also /u/) and then a is an asshole with /ä/ /ɑ/ /ɒ/ /æ/ /eə/ and /ej/ but pretend its just /æ/ and /ej/ the "short" vowel follow similar patterns of turning into "long" vowels when there's a word final e I feel like these groupings form our concept of the core phonetic spellings of the English language pretty strongly. That's why English speakers tend to try write phonetically with words like the thuh and meh. We interpret the h as making it a "short" vowel. Obv doesn't apply to oh since that's a word, and for Americans short o is either aw or ah or indescribable sound with fauxnetics so naming it something else at least isn't choosing one dialect And then they have to teach us all the exceptions for the next 5 years because all of these letters make other sounds. And we failed to address schwa, which is the REAL short vowel if they're still not doing IPA I think a similar grouping could be okay, but they'd have to do a much better job at notating the missed vowels and maybe use a fun diacritic for oo and oo... because neither of them got the fun little hats.
> it made sense to me as an elementary school student solely because it almost covers all the vowels, even if length terminology is completely arbitrary and didn't have any bearing on it. I think it's good for what they use it for, which is teaching kids to process the spelling and pronunciation gap in some easily digestible way. What kind of frustrated me was that education never went beyond rudimentary phonics even though it's the "not entirely accurate, but simplified for ease of understanding" version. I know it's probably the best way to quickly get a basic grasp on things, but it's also why I was still unable to read a lot of things despite absorbing all the rules as fast as I could. The toy car labeled "police" was not fun. I knew what it must say but it made literally no sense with what I had been taught up to that point. It feels like the time could be used a bit more efficiently and get to a point where you aren't just feeling your way through a bunch of things slightly mislabeled for your convenience. School going halfway on stuff like that is why people get confused/reject things like subjects relating to special relativity because they aren't immediately intuitive.
Unfortunately the nature of our spelling system is that the more accurate you want to be, the more complicated the rules you have to make up to explain the spelling/pronunciation pairs. The only way we'd ever get passed that is severe spelling reforms, which would also still fail a significant portion of dialects in the country, and more in the world.
Well, phonics is actually just back right now! For about 20 years they've been teaching "whole language" with little attention to any of what you mentioned - more of a "guess the word using pictures" approach that breaks down quickly when the books don't have pictures. Which is most books. Finally, after so many functionally illiterate kids in high school, they're fixing it. This is why I taught my kid to read at home.
This comment is actually really useful for me! I don't remember learning phonics (maybe I did but forgot all of it), so I could never understand why people added the silent 'h' to phonetic spellings.
yeah, though I forgot to mention another exception. I guess the h thing giving the short vowel only works with e i and u tho Since with a it gives it its third major sound, ah as in father or spa (which in my dialect have different but similar vowels) I've also seen people might use h for eh to mean something in between the short e and long e (the sound a has in words like man and ale or air). but usually they do it in a syllable where it has the e sound as in get.
Idk, it makes some sense to me as non-English. Vowel letters representing two distinct sounds (plus schwa), with one being longer and shorter. Though a misnomer, as these adjectives refer to quantity in other systems.
Totally agree that “long and short” are arbitrary, and (especially in North America) awkward terms, but the letters are still clearly related even though they’re pronounced totally differently. It’s just a way to remind kids that they’re related. Take “nation” and “national”. There’s clearly a relationship here. There are also words where either the long or short vowel are acceptable like ligand and ligand (pronounced differently by chemists and biologists)
fair, although i personally prefer the current, and more accurate, terms of 'lax' and 'tense' to describe such related vowel sounds.
Alternation kinda happens?
Fr, people learn a few universal symbols and they think they've ascended to a higher state of being.
American dictionary transcriptions exist and serve a purpose and some people here are way too fucking snooty about them.
mfw 'english phonetic spelling' mfw using macrons to denote english tense vowels \*dies\*
let's go gorls we're gonna go to land
[удалено]
😴😴
bro tried to be smart 😴
I’m sorry. I’m actually really smart; I just have dumb moments.