User talk:Peter238/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Peter238, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Getting started
• Introduction to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! John of Reading (talk) 16:42, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. John of Reading (talk) 16:42, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the trouble. --Peter238 (talk) 20:16, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Not a problem! There are a lot of behind-the-scenes rules here, and no one expects newly-registered editors to know them all. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:35, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Peter238, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Peter238! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Jtmorgan (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:10, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Module:IPA symbol/data

When you edited Module:IPA symbol/data, you didn't add a correspondences entry for voiceless uvular trill, and it's breaking things. Can you add one? Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:05, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

It's there (lines 418 to 422) but it probably doesn't work. I have no idea how to fix this... it's probably the reason why Template:IPA consonant chart links ⟨ʀ̥⟩ to Uvular trill, rather than Uvular trill#Voiceless uvular trill. Peter238 (talk) 22:10, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Lines 418 through 422 is the entry in the symbols section. That's fine. The problem is you need to add an entry in the correspondences section as well, which you didn't do. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but now I can't do anything. "Script error: Lua error at line 3709: '}' expected (to close '{' at line 1784) near 'local'. " is what I get when I try to save. Peter238 (talk) 22:28, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Tell me what the name, wikipage, soundfile, and type should be, then, and I'll add it for you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:31, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! It should be just like "uvular trill", except that it needs to have "voiceless" in front of it. The page name is Voiceless uvular trill, with a capital ⟨v⟩. Peter238 (talk) 22:33, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

What about the soundfile and type? Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:48, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Well, it's a consonant, obviously. The soundfile should be called voiceless uvular trill.ogg . Peter238 (talk) 22:49, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

File:voiceless uvular trill.ogg doesn't exist. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:54, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't but someone can record it. Some of the files listed there don't exist either. Peter238 (talk) 22:55, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I've added it. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:58, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. However, Template:IPA consonant chart still links ⟨ʀ̥⟩ to Uvular trill, rather than Uvular trill#Voiceless uvular trill. I'm not sure how to fix that, but that's definitely not how things should be. Peter238 (talk) 23:05, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

That's now fixed as well. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:13, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again. Peter238 (talk) 23:19, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

There seems to be a major bug with Template:IPA consonant chart now... try looking at it at the bottom of voiceless alveolar sibilant page, for example. Peter238 (talk) 23:39, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. Try WP:PURGE. Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:43, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

It appears to be working fine now. Thanks. Peter238 (talk) 09:25, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Note that I've now simplified the module so that symbols and correspondences are together, so you won't have any of these problems in the future. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:33, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Very kind of you! Thanks again. Peter238 (talk) 10:17, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Spanish in Morocco

I see you reverted and then unreverted my edition in Spanish phonology. Be wary of sources that hint at the existence of native speakers of Spanish in Morocco. I've read in several places that sort of innuendo, and it always ends up being a forgery. Except for the few remaining speakers of Haketia, if you consider that a dialect of Spanish, there are no native speakers of Spanish in Morocco, other than expatriates. --Jotamar (talk) 18:46, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Peter238 (talk) 13:22, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Scouse

I noticed your recent edit to Scouse and your return to add sources. May I suggest I do not need to "do the research" as I find this quite laughable that someone not necessarily yourself, is promoting "Merseyside English" as another name for Scouse. I am sorry that is quite ridiculous and does not merit consideration. I don't doubt there are sources but they appear to be rather dubious in my opinionBabydoll9799 (talk) 22:20, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

The fact that some (perhaps few) academic sources use a quite uncommon name (that is "Merseyside English") for what is know as the Scouse dialect/accent isn't something we can dispute, much like water being wet. What is indisputable though, is that it isn't the most common way of calling this dialect/accent. That we probably agree on. Peter238 (talk) 22:34, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

To be respectful, I've never heard of it. I remain unmoved that it is someone's (ie an academics) imagination and it has suddenly got in to books.Babydoll9799 (talk) 22:39, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

I answered you on Talk:Scouse. Let's keep the discussion there, ok? Peter238 (talk) 22:52, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Chemnitz German phonology

Nicely done. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 00:08, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll put more info soon. Peter238 (talk) 15:23, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Talk page link in your signature

What dialect might "visit my talk page" be transcribed in? :-) 213.7.56.181 (talk) 01:28, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Estuary English. It also matches the way some Australians speak, apart from the first word, in which the second vowel would be [ə]. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 07:52, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Under what circumstances is /v/ devoiced in Estuary English? 213.7.56.181 (talk) 12:00, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Roach (2004:240) writes "Voicing of so-called voiced consonants is often very weak or even undetectable, a fact which has led to the idea that force of articulation is what distinguishes pairs of obstruent consonants, /p/, for example, being classed as fortis (strongly articulated) and /b/ as lenis (weakly articulated). Vowels are markedly shortened before fortis consonants in the same syllable." See ifa.amu.edu.pl/~krynicki/teaching/cg/files/06_phonetics_ROACH.pdf - it's about RP, but it also applies to Estuary English, and General American/Australian/Canadian/New Zealand. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 12:19, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

And how would you distinguish minimal pairs of fricatives, like file and vile, if the /v/ in vile is devoiced? 213.7.56.181 (talk) 12:55, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

By their duration and strength. /f/ is longer and stronger than /v/. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 16:16, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Is this conjecture? I find it very hard to believe voiced fricatives are devoiced in RP, especially utterance-initially. 213.7.56.181 (talk) 16:48, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I've already provided a source - Roach 2004. Click the link above. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 17:07, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Peter doesn't claim what you're claiming. He says in regard to voiced consonants in general that, "Voicing [...] is often very weak or even undetectable", but he doesn't expand on fricatives. Where does he claim that the distinguishing cues of voiced fricatives are duration and strength?

It is -- indeed -- understood that voiced fricatives will be partially or sometimes even fully devoiced in rapid speech as part of assimilatory processes, but why would the /v/ at the very beginning of an utterance be devoiced? You may be inclined to draw a parallel with voiced stops, which are -- in fact -- (mostly) voiceless as a general rule, but it does not seem to me that the same holds true for fricatives, and neither does your source state any such thing. 213.7.56.181 (talk) 17:44, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Roach does claim that it is duration, and says nothing about strength. Strength, indeed, is my conjecture (probably a correct one). Listen, if you can provide a reliable source which states that RP/Estuary fricatives are most often voiced, I'll change my signature right away. Until that, it stays as it is. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 17:57, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh no, I wasn't trying to get you to change your signature. I didn't even mean to doubt you when first I asked; I asked 'cause I was honestly curious. 213.7.56.181 (talk) 18:07, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Ok. My understanding is that English lenes are voiceless or weakly voiced, unless they are in an intervocalic position. I'm not so sure about the latter though. As I said, I'll be happy to change my perception when proper evidence is presented. Perhaps I myself will dig into it, who knows. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 19:08, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for the delay in answering. If you want a ref., you could cite my English Phonetics and Phonology (CUP, 2009, 4th Ed.), where I wrote "The fortis fricatives are said to be articulated with greater force than the lenis and their fricative noise is louder. The lenis fricatives have little or no voicing in initial and final positions, but may be voiced when they occur between voiced sounds. Fortis fricatives ... shorten a preceding vowel..." (p 40). It's not just me saying this, of course, as I think that's standard teaching about RP-style English pron. My book is only an introductory textbook, and I am aware that the mention of "initial and final positions" should really be more thoroughly explained. Now for a more general point: I am often asked questions similar to this one, and I am always tempted to say that if you do a few spectrograms of the sounds in question you can get scientific evidence of whether your hypothesis is right or wrong. I'd be happy to provide a few spectrograms of initial fricatives, if I could think of a good way to introduce them into a discussion on a WP Talk page. Maybe I should look at putting such stuff on YouTube? It's funny that there are lots of good free programs on the web which do spectrograms, but it's very hard to find good introductory tutorials on how to use them in phonetic analysis. I did start to produce some stuff myself on one of my websites, but that was before I retired. Maybe I should go back to it. RoachPeter (talk) 10:36, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, it seems I was wrong. Thanks to you both. 213.7.22.7 (talk) 12:31, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. And I made a mistake: it should be "Roach does claim that it is strength, and says nothing about duration. Duration, indeed, is my conjecture (probably a correct one)." - the other way around. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 15:13, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Russian palatalization and vowels

I'm pretty sure that Mikhail Ordin's "Palatalization and Intrinsic Prosodic Vowel Features in Russian" in Language and Speech (2011; 54.4) has some helpful insights and citations to help on the matter of the effect that Russian consonants' hardness and softness have on vowel quality. But I'm a bit too tired to read it. If you can't access it yourself, pop me an email and I can send it your way. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt]} 03:07, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Indeed, I can't access it. Please send it to my email, as I can't find your e-mail address anywhere. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 11:23, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

 Done. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt]} 15:28, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Woah, nice. I'll read them, thanks. Can you join our discussion though? There seems to be consensus that we need to change in some way the Dutch part of the column. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 15:59, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

IPA for Dutch

Hello Peter238,

I noticed that you made some changes on various IPA realisations of Belgian (place) names.

1) Constant Vanden Stock: a correct realistation is /ə/ not /ɛ/

/ɛ/ is -to use Collins & Mees terminology- (NL) ABN while /ə/ is (B) AN

In this situation there is no generic realisation. Since Vanden Stock is Belgian, it seems logical to use a Standard Belgian Dutch realisation. Besides, several sources (Verhoeven, Collins & Mees, but also Peeters) used on this page emphasise the coexistence of two standard variaties which each cover just a part of the Dutch language area. This information is practically absent from the current version of the IPA chart.

In the following Belgian family names the <e> in <der>/<den> is always pronounced as a schwa: Van Den Driessche, Van der Elst, Vandermeersch, Vandenberg ... Place names such as Heist-op-den-Berg or Tervuren also contain a schwa, as opposed to their NL counter parts Den Bosch or Terschelling. A another example of this NL/B distinction can be seen here. The definite article <het> is pronounced /ɦət/ in B and /ɦɛt/ in NL. Both audio files feature standard pronunciation. Also note that in (B) AN <den> ("pine tree") and <den> (archaic declension of de/het) are not homophones.

2) Marianne Thyssen

Marianne in B and in NL is not pronounced identically;

NL: Marianne usually consists of four syllables (cf. audio file on Marianne Vos)

B: Marianne usually consists of only two syllables (cf. close to French /ma.ʁjan/ but rather /mɑrˈjɑn/)

When media refer to Marianne Thyssen, her name is usually pronounced with three syllables /mɑrˈjɑnə/

3) José

The current Belgian Dutch realisation is not correct. The <o> in José is shorter than the <oo> in Joost, the <é> is also shorter than the <ee> in "zee". You should not forget the pronuciation of many names in Standard Belgian Dutch is still close to the French pronunciation. I know that IPA does not have these sounds for Dutch, but this illustrates that naming conventions do not necessarily follow standard IPA rules. In such cases it is important to provide an accurate rather than an artificial realisation.

4) Frieda Brepoels

Although her first name ends with an open syllable, the <a> is pronounced /ɑ/ in B. The contribution of Atlas89 was correct. Again this illustrates that naming conventions do not necessarily follow standard IPA rules.

5) Sint-Agatha-Berchem

The three <a>'s are not pronounced identically. This is shown by the standard pronunciation found in the audio file.

6) The realisation of <au>/<ou>

I wondered why you chose /ʌu/ as the generic realisation of <au>/<ou>. Collins & Mees (which is used as the main source material) gives /ɑu/ as a "standard". If /ʌu/ is NL and /ɔu/ is B, I don't understand why you decided to mention only /ʌu/ in the IPA and why you changed all occurrences of /ɔu/ (which is a standard realisation) into /ʌu/. E.g.: Zoutleeuw, Boutersem, Oud-Heverlee, Oud-Turnhout, Hulshout, Herenthout ...

Kind regards,

Vego2 (talk) 15:39, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello and thanks for the feedback.

3) and 6)

[eː, oː, ʌu] are pandialectal, phonemic symbols representing a fairly wide range of phonetic realisations, including smaller or larger vowel length. We decided to remove the north/south distinction from Help:IPA for Dutch and Afrikaans - don't forget that all transcriptions that link to that guide must adhere to the transcription system used there. I left ⟨ʌu⟩ rather than changed it to ⟨ɑu⟩ due to the fact that Gussenhoven (1999) uses ⟨ʌu⟩. Neither is completely incorrect for NL ABN, since both Gussenhoven (1999) and Collins & Mees (2003) locate the starting point of it in the near-open near-back region (precisely: [ʌ̞̈], [ɑ̝̈] or [ɐ̠].).

You're probably right about the rest. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 17:39, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Eddie Niedzwiecki

Hi Peter, I have remoned your edit from Eddie Niedzwiecki. As per MOS:BLPLEAD "Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability", so Polish ancestry, and language, are irrelevant to a Welsh footballer. Cheers. Murry1975 (talk) 12:53, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

I've just added Polish IPA, not the information that Niedźwiecki is of Polish ancestry. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 13:33, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Ram's horns (mid back unrounded vowel)

You have reverted my edit on the stress mark on the word "number".

I am a native of Singapore (check my user page) and know that the word "number" is usually said with the stress on the second syllable, opposed to usual varieties of English. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gcjdavid (talk • contribs) 07:04, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

And yet the whole Singaporean example is unsourced. Please read WP:OR — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 07:53, 30 January 2015 (UTC)