[OT] Standard Pronunciation Characters Font Needed
- Thread starter el-remmen
- Start date
Bran Blackbyrd
Explorer
Rav said:I still think it's funny that it's always the Americans who can't do it the international way but have to resort to their own way, as usual
Unless you're really interested in this sort of thing, I imagine most americans wouldn't be aware that there is any other way, nor care. A lot of people just learn how to pronounce stuff in school and never bother cracking open a dictionary again. And now that you can spellcheck docs without needing a dictionary...
Yes it's sad, I know, but it could always be worse.
*Tongue in cheek* Once again a european has mistaken what a select few sholars and/or politicians have decided for what the majority of americans think.
Of course I'm just teasing, no offence.
Darraketh
First Post
In American the pronunciation of various words varies depending on what part of the country you are in or from.
There are hundreds of regional accents. And even if a person doesn't have a markedly different accent you can tell they are not from a particular area by the way they "correctly" pronounce the areas place names.
There are hundreds of regional accents. And even if a person doesn't have a markedly different accent you can tell they are not from a particular area by the way they "correctly" pronounce the areas place names.
bondetamp
First Post
It should also be said that while IPA is very good for all kinds of languages, it can be overkill if you just want to study your own. If American English is the only language you're going to bother with, then you won't need most of the IPA symbols, and using IPA will mostly just make it harder for other people to read.
At the institute of Nordic languages (defined as all the languages that evolved from old Norse), where I'm studying at the moment, we use both IPA and a method made specially for Norwegian called Norvegia (how creative). We use Norvegia most of the time since it is good enough and a lot easier to learn. When I studied a few credits of linguistics, we used IPA exclusively, but had two methods for transcribing the words. One full version, using all of IPA's bells and whistles, and one more spartan one, where everything that wasn't needed for a native's understanding of the transcription was left out. I prefer the IPA version, as it is nice to be able to use it for other languages, but I do understand why it isn't needed if all you want is to see different pronounciations of Norwegian words.
At the institute of Nordic languages (defined as all the languages that evolved from old Norse), where I'm studying at the moment, we use both IPA and a method made specially for Norwegian called Norvegia (how creative). We use Norvegia most of the time since it is good enough and a lot easier to learn. When I studied a few credits of linguistics, we used IPA exclusively, but had two methods for transcribing the words. One full version, using all of IPA's bells and whistles, and one more spartan one, where everything that wasn't needed for a native's understanding of the transcription was left out. I prefer the IPA version, as it is nice to be able to use it for other languages, but I do understand why it isn't needed if all you want is to see different pronounciations of Norwegian words.
Similar Threads
