I thought this thread was going to about beer. 
I’ve been using it for years, and I still would not consider myself fluent, as I have to look up sounds that I don’t use or talk about often, as well as basically any of the diacritics which are used for greater detail. I have particular mergers in my accent that make it hard for me to know what sound others use.
That’s why I push back so hard on the idea that people are lazy if they don’t want to learn it. No, it takes time and effort. And the vast majority of the time, when discussing sounds, there are other ways to do it. IPA is mostly useful for people who discuss this sort of thing often. Or, yes, who need the fine degree of detail.
As with any surprise, in which a events play out differently than a person’s expectations.
I’m curious if you expected, or did not expect, that ~75% of respondents cannot read IPA.
I had no particular expectations.
Seeing as he doesn’t seem to be an expert, I would presume he simply went and copied that pronunciation from a dictionary, likely one that showed both pronunciations of tomato with a provided sound clip. I don’t think any intention was to make it look overly complicated.
While it does use a bit more specificity (aspiration and vowel length are indicated), I’d say the biggest difference is simply that it is not written in an American accent. (I’m not sure if it’s British or Australian, as both have similar features, but the openness makes me think Australian.)
Tomayto vs tomahto is definitely a situation where I would just use modified spellings because it would be clear enough what was being talked about. IPA is mostly useful when you get into higher levels of specificity.
I personally am pleasantly surprised that 25%+ are familiar enough with it. That is pretty awesome and I’m glad I make the effort now to use IPA symbols in pronunciation threads (along with my approximations in “plain English.”)
Yes, I just copied and pasted the first IPA that I came across, because I can’t fact check that shit. For all I know, the word could have been written in a falsetto with burps separating the syllables. But I believe there is no anti-IPA cabal conspiring to insult its users and use subtle negging to make it seem more complex than it is. Hardly anybody actually cares about it at all.
Similarly, if some grandpa asks a grandson about their doll with laser sword; the kid need not get their nose out of joint because its a limited edition Kylo Ren action figure with his cross guard lightsaber geeeeeeeeeeeez!
As I read this, it came to me that I would compare the skill of knowing IPA as analogous to knowing how to tie good knots. I surely respect that some people know how to tie not only a bowline, clove hitch, and whatever, and of course they probably put them to quite good use. It’s also a pretty handy thing to know, too, if you find yourself in certain circumstances. But unless a person is a sailor, stagehand, crane operation, etc., they’re probably just going to tie like six square knots on the string that keeps the Christmas tree on the roof of their car and everything will be just fine, even if inelegant.
But maybe you are not a lexicographer. Isn’t that why (some, including some major) English dictionaries use the IPA as a pronunciation guide, so people learning the language can tell how to pronounce the words? Compare to the fanqie system traditionally used in Chinese dictionaries for a millennium: ‘cat’ (to use an analogy) might be glossed as c- as in can + -at as in bat. That’s possibly OK once one is a bit familiar with the dialect, but I wouldn’t want to randomly guess what ‘bei’ or ‘jing’ sound like without bootstrapping the process. ‘A’ as in ‘tomato’?
Come to think of it, along with the IPA, too, you need some sound samples for it to be useful, unless you already know most of them from imitating native speakers or your native language or have an excellent auditory imagination for how to pronounce alveolar clicks, voiced uvular fricatives, or what have you simply by reading a description.
This is awesome!!!
Due to my job, if I’m given a lat & long, a compass, map and ruler. I can get you there. I’d never expect some random person to do the same.
I voted that I’d heard of it but can’t read it; but now I’m not sure I’ve even heard of it properly. I didn’t recognize the acronym, but assumed from the description that I understood what it meant, and that I’d run into it; but I assumed that the dictionary version was the same thing, and I gather from this thread that it isn’t.
I don’t run into the situation often enough to make it worth taking the time to learn it, and these days when I want to know how to pronounce something I find an audio clip online.
I can read basic IPA fluently, but would have to look up all the extra aspirations and length markings most times.
Several mentions in this thread so far of IPA being used in Wikipedia. But no mention of this:
You don’t have to learn IPA in order to understand it for the occasional word you want to pronounce. In most pages where IPA is used, you can hover the mouse over each individual IPA symbol to see an explanation of what sound the symbol represents. Example:
If you hover the mouse pointer over the dʒ symbol in /ˌbeɪˈdʒɪŋ/ you will see:
No one said that it did. However, context matters and statements possibly made in response to insults may not be indicative of anything greater.
For Spanish yes.
For English not so well, but I often find it useful simply to see whether two vowels are the same, close or very different, and whether two consonants are the same or not (the two “th” sounds for example).
Depends which dictionary. For example, the Oxford English Dictionary and Learner’s Dictionary use it, while Webster’s dictionary does not.
I picked “fluently” because in college linguistics class I was able to sight-read English paragraphs in IPA (although as others have said that doesn’t come up that much as opposed to words). Given some practice I’d be able to pick it up again.
However, I don’t even know how a lot of the symbols that are not used in English speech are supposed to sound, so I can’t really sound them in my head whether they’re in IPA or Latin.
And man, does that bug the crap out of me. I get it. It’s an improved system or whatever. But Wiki–please just use the standard pronunciation guide most of us learned in school.
Annoyingly, I quoted posts and they’re not showing up. Oh well.
I learned IPA as a kid just by looking words up in physical dictionaries, then learned it more by studying linguistics.
When using it on a board like this, it’s useful as a disambiguation method. By that, I mean that occasionally you can just say “rhymes with” whatever, or something similar, and people will get what you mean. If they don’t, and say so, then adding the IPA can be helpful, as can adding it from the start. It makes it clearer without asking others to know IPA to the level of a PhD in linguistics, which I don’t have either, because IPA can be googled, same as any term people use that others don’t understand.
Sometimes it’s the only way to make it clear what sounds you’re pronouncing because everyone has already disagreed about the rhymes and sounds like definitions. It’s not ideal because not everyone knows IPA, but it’s all there is left in those situations, and they come up fairly frequently on here where people with different dialects are discussing pronunciation.
Plus, it often comes up in discussions where a lot of people there are using IPA alongside rhymes and the like, and getting along fine, and then someone comes along and says “I don’t know what you’re talking about.” Like if I went into an American football thread and demanded definitions of all the terms they were using.
The IPA that Ravenman posted is not the way people usually write in IPA on here, or in most places.
It’s an international site so it’d be a little odd if it defaulted to a system that only Americans (and only some of them) learned in school.
There is no “standard pronunciation guide” that isn’t I.P.A. Every dictionary has its own system. They don’t agree with each other. And the systems used in the United States are different from the systems used outside the United States.
Plus, if you know the English alphabet already, and you are already able to use some kind of phonetic symbol system, the basic, common I.P.A. symbols should be easy to learn.
Let’s start with this. These symbols mean exactly what you think they mean—
[p] ** [k] [g] [t] [d] [f] [v] [h] [l] [m] [n] [r] [s] [z] [w]
These symbols are simple substitutions for sounds you’re already familiar with—
[tʃ] [dʒ] [ʃ] [ʒ] [j] [θ] [ð] [ʊ] [ɛ]
And these are symbols most people learned in school
[ə] [ŋ]
You’re more than halfway there now.