[WikiEN-l] IPA issues

[stevertigo]

Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:

> I just assumed that if IPA were widely used, someone might have
> mentioned that in previous iterations of the arguments over its use.
> Perhaps that assumption is a mistake, if the limit of research done by
> IPA advocates is cherry picking Google search results. (Of course that
> comment is unfair, but then again, so was your characterisation of my
> previous post).

Keep in mind that I, for example, share many of your misgivings with IPA.
Nevertheless I recognize, as others here do, the benefits of using a single
pronunciation scheme. Granted, pronunciation is typically placed low on
most people's lists as far as language acquisition is concerned. In truth
it's not that low at all: Proper pronunciation of words in a new language
opens doors for new speakers.

> Even the IPA article mentions that EFL references use pronunciation
> guides.

I might agree to using a second standard, if that second standard was actually
a standard. It is instead something we cobbled together based on English.

My original premise, again, was that IPA be used across all wikis. If
its the in
fact the international standard that linguists claim it to be, then
why can't it be
used internationally. My suspicion may surprise other critics here in that I
see IPA as being not as international at it would like to be.

Still I favor of using a standard scheme like IPA accross all language wikis.
Even if the idea only stirs up debate, like ours here, that debate
that will likely
yield some positive results.

-Stevertigo