Talk:Phone (phonetics)/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Untitled
Isn't this a Phoneme?
No, a phoneme is a set of phones that carry the same meaning. Such phones are called allophones. --Damian Yerrick
Bad English
- In phonetics and phonology, a phone is a speech sound considered as a physical event without regard to its place in the sound system semantics of a language. A sound segment that possess distinct acoustic properties. A particular occurance of a speech sound segment. The basic sound unit revealed via phonetic speech analysis. Phonetic symbology is enclosed within square ([]) brackets. Compare with phoneme, a set of phones that carry the same meaning.
This topic is presumably of interest to linguists, and yet the above short paragraph contains a whole succession of sentences without main verbs, a spelling error ("occurance"), and a verb which doesn't agree with its subject ("segment that possess"). I would fix it, but I don't know whether these disjointed definitions are supposed to be alternatives or whether they all apply.
Main Page 17:19, 7 September 2005 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terra Green (talk • contribs)
- What's there to fix? That paragraph is not even in the article. rʨanaɢ (talk) 14:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- That post is from 2005. — Lfdder (talk) 21:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- No, you posted a comment yesterday complaining about the grammar of a paragraph that does not appear anywhere in the article. Since this page is for discussing improvements to the article, I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish here. rʨanaɢ (talk) 11:28, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- I restored part of the comment that was deleted by a vandal back in 2008. [1] — Lfdder (talk) 11:39, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- Well, that's what we have edit summaries for. How was I supposed to know what you were doing? Please edit more responsibly in the future. rʨanaɢ (talk) 11:42, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- I restored part of the comment that was deleted by a vandal back in 2008. [1] — Lfdder (talk) 11:39, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- No, you posted a comment yesterday complaining about the grammar of a paragraph that does not appear anywhere in the article. Since this page is for discussing improvements to the article, I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish here. rʨanaɢ (talk) 11:28, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
- That post is from 2005. — Lfdder (talk) 21:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Dead Link
In the reference section, the second reference, to Loos's book, gives me a 404 dead link. Could somebody check this and remove it if approriate, please?
David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 17:32, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Question
What exactly counts as a "distinct" speech segment? Speech is produced in real time, so any potential segments flow into each other. Also, whenever someone pronounces a given "phone", there are some differences in how it's pronounced. The tongue might move a tiny bit forward or backwards, in a way that might not be noticeable without careful measurements in a lab, for example. Also, is a "phone" defined by the physics of how it is anatomically pronounced? Or is it based on the physics of the waveform that is produced? Or is based on people's ability to hear the difference between two phones? The article uses IPA to give examples of phones, but that seems circular, because the IPA has symbols based on what is already established as being a phone (as far as I understand) JonathanHopeThisIsUnique (talk) 20:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)