Difference between revisions of "Talk:Portal:Phonetics and phonology"

From Glottopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(New page: This is really funny. Not only is there no article about phonemes, it isn't even listed as potential. Or do you think phonemes are no part of phonology? ~~~~)
 
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
[[User:Dkleinecke|Dkleinecke]] 00:06, 27 October 2007 (CEST)
 
[[User:Dkleinecke|Dkleinecke]] 00:06, 27 October 2007 (CEST)
 +
 +
:Do you mean no article on the [[Phoneme]], or do you mean no articles on individual phonemes, like [[voiced bilabial stop]] and [[high front tense unrounded vowel]]? I certainly agree there should be an article [[Phoneme]], and its omission from this list is far more likely by accident than design. As for individual phonemes, I'm less sure. Wikipedia has a separate article on every sound that has its own IPA character, but most of them are extremely short, and I'm not always convinced of their usefulness. —[[User:Antony Green|Tonio]] ([[User talk:Antony Green|tɔk tə mi]]) 07:30, 28 October 2007 (CET)

Revision as of 08:30, 28 October 2007

This is really funny. Not only is there no article about phonemes, it isn't even listed as potential.

Or do you think phonemes are no part of phonology?

Dkleinecke 00:06, 27 October 2007 (CEST)

Do you mean no article on the Phoneme, or do you mean no articles on individual phonemes, like voiced bilabial stop and high front tense unrounded vowel? I certainly agree there should be an article Phoneme, and its omission from this list is far more likely by accident than design. As for individual phonemes, I'm less sure. Wikipedia has a separate article on every sound that has its own IPA character, but most of them are extremely short, and I'm not always convinced of their usefulness. —Tonio (tɔk tə mi) 07:30, 28 October 2007 (CET)