User talk:Italian.scientist.99

Welcome!

Hi Italian.scientist.99! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Nardog (talk) 00:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Hello, I'm Remsense. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, English language, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Remsense ‥ 论 23:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop changing every single instance of /uː/ and /iː/ to /ʊu/ and /ɪi/.

I accidentally sent my edit to Phonological history of English consonant clusters before I was done typing, but I was going to say that:

#1: Long /uː/ and /iː/ HAVE existed in English, but have sense diphthongized in many, but not all dialects.

#2: Slashes represent broad, rather than narrow, transcription. On Wikipedia, and elsewhere, the standard is to represent these two sounds as /uː/ and /iː/. In narrow transcription of a specific dialect, feel free to write them as you please, but in broad transcription of the language as a whole, writing them as something else is incorrect.

I looked through your contribs and you've been making this same kind of edit across the site, regardless of it getting reverted almost every time. I'm assuming you're just making these edits out of ignorance, but if this keeps going on, it'll be vandalism. Hugo P. Behrmann (talk) 20:21, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not changing it out if ignorance. If you read English linguists (like dr. Geoff Lindsey) you will know /i:/ and /u:/ were invented out of nowhere by some minor linguists in 1800, bit actually never occurred as phonemes in actual English. But if we want to spread ignorance in Wikipedia because "it was always done like that" fine, I'll stop. Sorry for creating trouble. 46.234.205.173 (talk) 20:37, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've also watched a lot of Lindsey's stuff on YouTube, including his video on English phonetic symbols; it was pretty good! And I like Lindsey's system, but it's much more tuned specifically to modern accents in England, and it's not the standard on Wikipedia. It's true that /iː/ and /uː/ were basically gone from natural speech when they were reintroduced into transcription systems in the 1800s, but they did exist at one point, as a result of the Great Vowel Shift turning ME /oː/ into /uː/, ME /eʊ/ and /ɛʊ/ into /juː/, and ME /eː/ and /ɛː/ into /iː/. They then were largely diphthongized in the following centuries, to varying degrees; my accent, for example, which is pretty much General American, doesn't diphthongize /iː/ and it mostly just centralizes /uː/ (though it does also shorten both of them).

But my actual point is that broad and narrow transcription are completely different things, and in trying to represent every single Modern English accent (the purpose of broad transcription in most of the edits you were making), representing /iː/ and /uː/ as /iː/ and /uː/ perfectly represents the underlying phonemes, if not the actual realizations; but actual realizations are for narrow transcriptions, rather than broad transcriptions. They're not written like this just because "it was always done like that", but because it does actually make sense for them to be written like that specifically for the purpose of universally broad transcription. Writing them otherwise would be inconsistent with every other piece of transcription on Wikipedia, Wiktionary, and elsewhere, but more importantly, would be artifically limiting transcriptions' applicability and accuracy to accents outside of RP and its neighbors. Hugo P. Behrmann (talk) 00:31, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]