Help talk:IPA/Romansh

The author of the article is wrong about calling {{IPA|[ə]}} and {{IPA|[ɐ]}} phonemes, as these are phonetic realizations of one phoneme. We need to select one symbol (I suggest {{angle bracket|{{IPA|ə}}}}) to represent this phoneme and stick to it. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 17:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

:Actually, this is apparently the realization of a number of phonemes in unstressed position. If we can determine some criteria of when it is one the other (as is the case with Russian), then I would say we list them separately and use both. Otherwise, {{IPA|[ə]}} is fine. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt]} 18:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

::Thanks for the correction. From what I see, there may be no criteria, and they may be in free variation. Anyway, we need a source for that. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 18:59, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

:::The two are in free variation; both can be realizations of /a e/. This has been one of the big issues Romansh writers have argued about when standardizing Romansh, as some preferred to analyze the unstressed vowels as /a/ and others as /e/, which influenced their spelling preference. Romansh speakers tend to use {{IPA|[ɐ]}} as the unstressed version of /a/ and {{IPA|[ə]}} as unstressed /e/, but not always. Here are two sound samples of the same speaker pronouncing orthographic as {{IPA|[ə]}} in one word and {{IPA|[ɐ]}} in another: {{Audio|Roh-sursilvan-canzun.ogg|[kənˈtsʊn]}} vs. {{Audio|Roh-sursilvan-casa.ogg|[ˈkazɐ]}}. "Ricarda, Liver (1999), Rätoromanisch – Eine Einführung in das Bündnerromanische" gives more information on that, but I don't have the book available right now. --Terfili (talk) 09:01, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

There is a move discussion in progress on Help talk:IPA which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:18, 15 July 2017 (UTC)