Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Phonetics and Phonology / Re: full stops
« Last post by brittk on August 02, 2018, 03:48:15 AM »
Wow, thank you for the detail - it makes a lot more sense now.
One last thing... the ˈ symbol (I think it is called a secondary stress) that comes before the 'k'... if that is included, I am assuming it remains /ˈkʌrɪdʒ/ because it is still a phonemic spelling, not phonetic?
And, if this symbol is it used, it is then correct to use the syllable break for consistency?

So, it would be:    /ˈkʌr.ɪdʒ/
22
Phonetics and Phonology / Re: full stops
« Last post by Daniel on August 02, 2018, 03:43:02 AM »
Yes. /s/ is a phoneme, and [s] is one possible pronunciation of that phoneme.

If you're citing the lexical/underlying/phonemic/broad form of the word, then slashes should be used. However, it is also possible that is actually intended as the narrow pronunciation. If it is possible to pronounce the underlying form without any relevant phonological rules taking place, at the level of detail you're using for narrow transcription, then both could be correct.

Usually there are some differences. For example, the phoneme /k/ is usually aspirated word-initially in English as [kʰ]. Other changes might also apply depending on the phonological rules you've established and contextual effects. But perhaps this would be the way to write it:

/kʌrɪdʒ/
[kʰʌrɪdʒ]

Narrowness really does have multiple levels, down to the details of things like fast speech or even speech errors. So in the right situation you might also have as a pronunciation, monosyllabification:
[kʰʌrdʒ]
That's not a standard phonological rule, just something that might happen when speaking quickly. That would also go in square brackets as a specific pronunciation.

The idea behind // vs. [] is very simple, but in practice it depends on the level of detail you're using, and conventions.

Another example:
/kʌrɪdʒ/
vs.
[kʰʌɹɪdʒ]

The first uses the phoneme /r/ (there's no need to write any other contrastive symbol there, just "R", because English only has one), but when most English speakers pronounce it (see discussion above), they would actually use [ɹ] as the phonetic realization. You could make up a phonological rule of /r/>[ɹ] as needed, or however you want to explain that in your theory. (Or you could just call the phoneme /ɹ/ which is simpler.)

In the end, there is a lot of variation based on instructors, textbooks, researchers, theories, etc. Just follow the norms from whatever context you're working in-- your instructor/textbook's instructors, or if you're researching look at published papers. It depends on your analysis/theory, but also conventions like whether /r/ should be lazily used for English even though it's not the right symbol phonetically.

The best advice I can give is: (1) follow familiar/appropriate conventions; (2) think about intention (do you want to express an underlying/broad form, or a specific pronunciation, and why?).

---
Note: I had accidentally written [s] so that it made the end of my answer strikethrough above and "[s]" itself invisible (fixed now). My last post might have been confusing, maybe clearer now.

The forum automatically parses [s] as strikethrough unless you somehow avoid that, such as by inserting other tags. Here I'm writing "[[i][/i]s]" to demonstrate (with extra/unused italics just to offset it).
23
Phonetics and Phonology / Re: full stops
« Last post by brittk on August 02, 2018, 03:14:45 AM »
So what is "kʌrɪdʒ" - broad or narrow?
I.e. /kʌrɪdʒ/ or [kʌrɪdʒ]

Are there ever times when both are correct?
24
Phonetics and Phonology / Re: full stops
« Last post by Daniel on August 02, 2018, 02:45:57 AM »
Quote
I have read that forward slashes are used for phonetic translations and narrow transcriptions, whereas brackets are used for phonemic translation and broad transcriptions. Is this correct?
Yes, that is correct. The two different formats have different purposes.

If you are describing the lexical form of a word, as phonemes, use slashes. This is called a broad transcription.

If you are describing a specific phonetic pronunciation, after phonological changes have occurred, use brackets. This is called a narrow transcription. Note that there are different degrees of narrow transcriptions, but if you are using anything other than a broad phonemic transcription, you probably should consider it narrow.

As a very basic example, consider the phoneme /s/ in English, which has frequent allophones [s] and [z].
25
Phonetics and Phonology / Re: full stops
« Last post by brittk on August 02, 2018, 02:09:09 AM »
Thankyou Daniel! This makes sense.
Also, is it correct that the transcription is enclosed in forward slashes, rather than brackets? I have read that forward slashes are used for phonetic translations and narrow transcriptions, whereas brackets are used for phonemic translation and broad transcriptions. Is this correct? And, what is "kʌrɪdʒ" considered to be: /kʌrɪdʒ/ or [kʌrɪdʒ]?
26
Phonetics and Phonology / Re: full stops
« Last post by Daniel on August 02, 2018, 01:12:17 AM »
A period/full stop can be used to indicate a syllable break, but it isn't required or necessarily preferred to do so. (Similarly, words often are not written with spaces between them.)

A colon, however, is an easy/lazy typographical variant of the long vowel symbol "ː".
27
Phonetics and Phonology / full stops
« Last post by brittk on August 01, 2018, 09:22:51 PM »
Hello,

In the IPA spelling of various words, I have often come across versions that use full stops and colons.
E.g. I have seen 'county' spelled /kaʊnti/ and also /kaʊ.nti/
and 'courage' as spelled /kʌrɪdʒ/ as well as /kʌr.ɪdʒ/

Am I correct in thinking that It represents the break between syllables?

Thank you!
28
Phonetics and Phonology / Re: Translation assistance
« Last post by Daniel on July 31, 2018, 01:12:35 AM »
Quote
However, the choice of [r] as opposed to [ɹ] or [ɾ] is pretty regional -- non-white South African English is the only dialect that I know of that does that. 
Right,* but more importantly, there is a lot of inconsistency in the level of detail required in assignments (or used in publications), so that often <r> is the symbol representing the phoneme "/r/", which is actually pronounced [ɹ]. Bad practice, but convenient to type, and the "difference" in significance really depends on context.

*Some Scottish and a few other dialects may also sometimes have this, as well as non-native pronunciations which aren't inherently invalid for descriptive work.
29
Phonetics and Phonology / Re: Translation assistance
« Last post by panini on July 30, 2018, 10:14:53 PM »
If this is an assignment, the instructor really ought to provide you with a recording that you are supposed to transcribe. (1) Not everybody is actually a native speaker of English, so you can't be expected to know how the word is pronounced. I suppose it would be okay to require a student to submit a recording of their pronunciation, so the instructor can decide if it matches what you turn in. (2) Even if you do speak English, only the first and last segments are near-universal for English (although...tʃ does occur a non-trivial number of times).

However, the choice of [r] as opposed to [ɹ] or [ɾ] is pretty regional -- non-white South African English is the only dialect that I know of that does that. 
30
Phonetics and Phonology / Re: Translation assistance
« Last post by Daniel on July 30, 2018, 02:12:55 PM »
It depends on the specific dialect/accent, but what you have seems close enough.

If this is for an assignment, and it looks like it might be, then (1) you shouldn't ask about homework on the internet; and (2) follow the specific instructions and style provided by your instructor.

By the way, the term for this would be transcription (changing to a different writing system, including phonetic transcription), rather than translation (changing to a different language).
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10