There are strong opinions on both sides: I lean towards using IPA as unambiguous and fairly easy to find information on, starting with the Wiki article and the official website, but others object to having to read the obscure symbols of IPA.
So let’s find out what SDMB members with a poll: Do you like the use of the IPA to explain pronunciation on the SDMB?
I don’t think IPA usage should be mandated but I reserve the right to giggle behind my hand at people trying to compare pronunciations without using IPA or X-SAMPA or another phonetic notation system.
Yeah, WTF is that about? Pretty clearly written OP and leaves no mystery to the reader. Better than 99.9% of threads on this board that have abstruse acronyms.
I voted “prefer” because I do, but sometimes in the flow of a thread I just can’t be arsed, especially when the thread has already gone down a non-IPA “sounds like ‘pen’. Do you mean ‘pen’ or ‘pin’?” rabbit hole. I feel dragging IPA into a thread like that would just show everyone else up
If you want to be clear and unambiguous about pronunciation, when communicating to others who care about clear and unambiguous pronunciation, there’s really no substitute for using a system designed for that, and IPA is the most widespread and broadly understood such system.
However, there are also a lot more people who don’t know IPA (including myself), and for such people, IPA provides no understanding at all.
So the best practice is to simply give the pronunciation twice, once using IPA and once using more familiar phonetics, with the understanding that any ambiguity in the familiar phonetics is resolved by the IPA.
IPA is easily learned by elementary-school children (cite: my nephews.) If only it were a regular part of the curriculum. It’s day one (know it on day two; we’re not going over this again) of any intro to linguistics class. Anyone who understands its utility, is interested in discussing pronunciation, and refuses to understand it is deliberately ignorant and should not be accommodated.
I try to give pronunciations in both IPA and ad-hoc means, but I know the latter creates tremendous ambiguity, especially in a diverse forum.
I don’t think IPA should be mandatory, but anyone who is interested in discussing pronunciation should learn it and use it—it takes only a matter of an hour or two to master the basic symbol set for common English sounds.
It is simply not realistic to expect that there be any kind of enlightening conversation on these boards about pronunciation without using IPA.
As for people who actually object to IPA—so far as I’m concerned, they’re not interested in fighting ignorance.
It’s like Esperanto, but much, much worse. It’s an artificial answer to a problem that can be solved by many other means. The idiots who came up with the system were lucky that stupidity was not a crime, because they had lethal levels of stupidity.
I agree (as those participating in the other thread already know). There is a reason that such a small minority of people in the world actually know and use IPA, despite its 130-ish years of existence.
It does have its place- I can see it being an indispensable tool for linguists. But for your average Joe (and, I would argue, a majority of your above-average Joes), it provides little to no practical benefit.
IPA was brewed so it could withstand the long trip to India. As such it’s something less than fulfilling. I don’t know what is taken out, but I basically don’t like it. It’s crap beer that only a peasant would find appealing, think Coors Light.
I’m sure others prefer a decent porter or stout, but to insist the teeming millions stick to IPA is just … well … just so American … no offense intended.
I voted for “Some other opinion, which I will explain,” so I suppose it behooves me to explain it.
I do not know IPA, and my immediate perception is that it would require more effort than I am willing to expend to learn it. I come here to enjoy myself; NOT, as a general rule, to find PITA chores that take away from my time enjoying myself.
Anyway, if you drink enough IPA, everything sounds like blth, nthl ggggglllrrr…
Translated into English: “Of course we should use IPA to post such things. It’s the standard.”
It took me fully ten minutes to figure out how to translate that. Not the most productive ten minutes of my life (in terms of enjoying my time on the Dope). Maybe if there was an online IPA-to-English translating utility we could copy and paste to.
