User talk:Erutuon/2013
Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!
edit| World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you! | |
|---|---|
 |
Hi Erutuon! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editors are welcome! (But being multilingual is not a requirement.) Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 22:32, 29 May 2013 (UTC) |
AG and palatal approximant
editIs this not presumed to have been a non-syllabic [i], part of a (falling) diphthong? It sounds a little misguided to me to say that [j] was lost and not the vowel, especially when we've no idea what the articulatory specifics of it might've been. — Lfdder (talk) 00:33, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
- There is a non-syllabic [i] in falling diphthongs, but there's also a palatal approximant, only present in pre-Ancient Greek, that either becomes part of a diphthong, is strengthened or weakened, or is lost. (Fortition and lenition of this palatal approximant result in zeta or rough breathing.) Sometimes it's hard to say whether a sound is the non-syllabic /i/ or the consonant [j], but at the beginning of words it would be considered a consonant and could not be part of a diphthong, since no rising diphthongs are considered to exist in Ancient Greek. The distinction between a non-syllabic [i] and a [j] is blurry, especially since the second changes to the first in some cases, but as far as the Greek grammar I linked to is concerned, it is considered to have existed. — Eru·tuon 01:07, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
- Ah interesting, I didn't know there used to be the consonant [j]. [j] > [h] must be rather unusual. Thanks for taking the time to explain! — Lfdder (talk) 01:46, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Ibn Battuta
editThanks for the correction on Ibn Battuta. I must have been confused. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
help request
editHi. Please look at: http://postimg.org/image/rs5cg9bbh/034366e6/ - Kwami said "Looks like a bunch of markup language got mixed in, and that they're saying that Turkish cacık comes from Greek τζατζικι " - so, not so much interested in where the Turkish word comes from as trying to find out what this Greek word comes from, such as the English word 'fortress' comes from Old French forteresse "strong place." Thanks! !!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by HammerFilmFan (talk • contribs) 06:58, August 22, 2013
Hello, the word beige and mer possess the /ɛ/ phoneme, not /ɛː/. When the /ɛ/ phoneme is before the /z, ʒ, v, ʁ/, it becomes automatically [ɛː]. 198.105.126.178 (talk) 13:18, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't add those words; User talk:TaalVerbeteraar did. I understand /ɛ/ is lengthened before those sounds, but because I don't know very much about French phonology, I wasn't sure whether the long vowel was phonemic or lengthened because of its position, and I couldn't revert the addition of those words. You are free to do so if you wish. — Eru·tuon 00:43, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
tête
editYou hear [tɛːt] or [taɪ̯t] ? 198.105.108.2 (talk) 10:45, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
- Definitely more like [taɪ̯t]: it's a diphthong. The first part might be close to [æ] rather than [a], though. But that's like [a] in French generally. — Eru·tuon 11:36, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
hiver
editIs it a diphthong in the second syllable ? 198.105.117.92 (talk) 22:05, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, it sounds like a diphthong. How many of these soundfiles do you have to ask me about? — Eru·tuon 01:30, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- Already two soundfiles, because I like Quebec accent. 198.105.101.46 (talk) 10:48, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
key
editThis song is in F major or G-flat major ? 198.105.101.46 (talk) 21:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
tempête
editYou hear [tãpɛɪ̯t], [tãpaɪ̯t] or [tãpɐɪ̯t] ? It's difficult to guess. 198.105.109.164 (talk) 15:24, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
- It sounds like the diphthong is [ɐɪ̯]. It sounds like a Minnesotan saying the /aɪ/ diphthong before a voiceless sound, which I would transcribe as [ɐɪ̯]. — Eru·tuon 01:50, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Maybe this one is [tɐɪ̯t]. 198.105.109.128 (talk) 22:22, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Help:IPA for French
editThe word caisse is traditionally pronounced /kɛːs/. See http://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/caisse 198.105.109.164 (talk) 20:55, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Purported Metathesis of "Iron"
editWhat you seem to be claiming is that "isern" underwent rhotacism to "irern" and then subsequently had the second "r" dropped, and THEN underwent metathesis /aɪɹɛn/ -> /aɪɚn/.
While this is indeed a possibility--if not only due to the many dialectual {spelling and pronouncing "dialectal" like that is a force of habit that I don't plan on correcting at this point in time} forms of "isern" that existed in the Old English period, including ones that already had lost the second "r"--is it not also possible that an s-debuccalization happened in some dialects (à la Proto-Celtic *īsarno- -> Old Irish íarn -> Irish iarann) causing the modern pronunciation to exist?
Alternatively, could it not also be a combination of the two? Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 19:56, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- No. I am not claiming anything about isern. Isern is one Old English form among many. According to the Oxford English Dictionary entry, it's not the form that gave rise to the Modern English form; īren is. Isern may be the most common in Old English literature (I don't know), but that has no import in whether it is the form that gave rise to the corresponding Modern English word. Modern English descends from a different dialect (maybe Mercian) than the dominant dialect of Old English literature (West Saxon), and contains forms (in both pronunciation and spelling) descending from other dialects as well.
- Determining which of the Old English forms gave rise to the Modern English form is usually done by comparing them and determining which of them would have become the Modern English form based on the known sound changes. Suppose we are given the Old English forms isern, isen, irn, iren. (These are the four categories of forms that existed in Old English, taken from the Forms section of the Oxford English Dictionary entry on iron.) Any of these could have given rise to the Modern English form, since they all existed, but iren is the most easy to explain using the sound changes we have observed in other words, so it is the likely candidate.
- You're talking about deletion, not debuccalization, since debuccalization is the changing of a sound to a glottal. But neither one is likely. I can't recall any examples of debuccalization in English, and debuccalization affects a voiceless s, but the s between vowels in Old English was voiced. The s in isern would be pronounced [z]. Debuccalization and deletion are much more common in the Gaelic languages than in English.
- Rhotacism occurred in the period from Proto-Germanic to Old English, and one explanation of the form īren says it's due to deletion of the r (isen) and rhotacism (iren). Another explanation says it was due to metathesis (isren) and assimilation (irren) and simplification (iren).
- Whichever explanation is correct, the form iren existed in Old English, and it is the form most likely to have given rise to the Modern English spelling and pronunciation. At one point the word iron was pronounced roughly as spelled, and since its current pronunciation reverses two of the phonemes in that pronunciation, it can be said to have undergone metathesis. — Eru·tuon 01:48, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- While you present a likely explanation, is it not theoretically possible that a dialectual "isen" or "iern" survived in a few areas (as "ich" and "ey" did) and that form could have influenced the modern form's pronunciation? It doesn't seem too far fetched to me. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 19:13, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- Sure, there are examples like that — busy is spelled according to one dialect and pronounced according to another — but you'd have to fill out your explanation a bit for it to be more than just "not far fetched". How would isen or irn be pronounced if they were taken into Modern English? Do they appear in any modern dialects? Is their pronunciation in Modern English similar to the pronunciation of iron in standard English, similar enough to have been the influence that caused the observed change in pronunciation?
- For my part, I think those two forms would be pronounced something like [aɪzən] and [ərn] (though I don't know enough to say for sure), so I highly doubt this explanation. [ərn] isn't anything like [aɪərn]. [aɪzən] is a little like [aɪərn] — it's at least got the same vowels — but I don't think there's enough similarity. There are differences in consonants: one has [z] and the other has an [r] in a different place. The pronunciation and spelling of busy at least have the same consonants.
- To me, metathesis seems a far simpler explanation, and it seems far more intuitive, since metathesis involving [r] is an easy speech error to make. — Eru·tuon 01:02, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Your explanation makes sense. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 13:22, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
- While you present a likely explanation, is it not theoretically possible that a dialectual "isen" or "iern" survived in a few areas (as "ich" and "ey" did) and that form could have influenced the modern form's pronunciation? It doesn't seem too far fetched to me. Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 19:13, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Template:PlantFiles has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. First Light (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Your Hebrew font
editPlease see my reply if it is helpful. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 15:37, 30 November 2013 (UTC)