Talk:стол

/stoɫ/ vs /stol/

@Wiki. Re: All hard л's in Russian are technically [ɫ], but unless we want to do this consistently in all entries, I think we should stick with /l/. Why did you revert /stoɫ/? What's wrong with being more correct or more specific? Not being able to update all other entries with hard /l/ is not a reason not to improve the ones you can get hold of. алло and Макдоналдс can have both hard and /ɫ/ and /lʲ/. I find this revert and edit summary pushy. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:29, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

It's not an improvement. In phonemic transcriptions, consistency is much more important than accuracy. For example, many English dictionaries use /r/ even though it is pronounced [ɹ]. If people see a transcription like /stoɫ/ for "стол", but /lampə/ for "лампа", they might assume that there are two different l-sounds in these words, even though there aren't. алло and Макдоналдс have nothing to do with this. --WikiTiki89 04:38, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Okey, I'll let you off this time, as there are indeed too many Russian entries to update. In my observation, there is not so much consistency with English entries and Mandarin entries changed the way tones in IPA are rendered recently, even if there are still many in the old style, thanks to Wyang's accelerated entry creation templates. You yourself have marked secondary accents, used ., which are already inconsistent with otherwise much simpler IPA in the Russian entries, e.g. IPA^(key): /ˌɛs.ɛnˈxa/. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:51, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree that there is a lot of inconsistency, but that doesn't mean we should go around making more of it. As for secondary accents, most words don't have them, and when they do, they usually only indicate that the vowel is not reduced. If you don't want to indicate secondary accents, then I will agree to remove the ones I have added. --WikiTiki89 04:58, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I have no strong opinion on /ɫ/ but I'd prefer you discussed it before reverting as if it were erroneous. I lean towards more accurate IPA but because it's hard to be consistent, I'm not insisting on it, besides there are many audio recording, so that people are able to see, what variety of IPA they have to work with. Look, /ɫ/ is easy for English speakers but German, French, Arabic and Asians have more trouble with the Russian hard /ɫ/ and /lʲ/, they also don't need to assume that /l/ is the same in all European languages and in all positions. How do people know that it's a hard /l/, even if it's not marked with /ʲ/? French, German, Arabic final "l" sounds quite different from Russian. You'll also notice that ru:wiki gets more detailed IPA. We may want to revisit the IPA for Russian. As I said, I don't mind a more detailed IPA, like IPA^(key): /ˌɛs.ɛnˈxa/. The more detailed, the better but it must be error-free, be careful with voicing, e.g /ˌnoʊdˈbuk/ has /d/, I also can't imagine how avoid voicing in /lɨtˈdɨb(ə)r/. For me /lɨˈdːɨbr/ sounds much more natural, words бобр, добр, храбр don't get an /ə/ before /r/. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:16, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Well that's the thing about phonemic transcriptions; they are meant for people with some familiarity with the phonology of the language. Phonetic transcriptions, on the other hand (the ones with square brackets [] rather than slashes //) are meant to accurately describe the sound of the word with enough detail that even someone without familiarity with the phonology of the language (but an expert on IPA) would be able to pronounce it. Phonemic transcriptions (in my opinion) are more important than phonetic transcriptions. For an example, English apple, lamp, and getting are phonemically transcribed as /ˈæpəl/, /læmp/, and /ˈɡɛtɪŋ/, but phonetically (in my dialect) as [ˈæpɫ̪̩], [l̪ẽːə̯mp], and [ˈɡʲɛɾɪŋ] (due to likely font problems, note the ɫ̪̩ in apple has the bridge below and vertical line below, indicating it is both dental and syllabic; and the l̪ in lamp has the bridge below, indicating it is dental). The phonetic transcriptions are more accurate, but if we had only phonetic transcriptions for these words, no one would be able to understand the IPA, and also it would be much harder to represent every dialect. --WikiTiki89 05:50, 29 January 2014 (UTC)