This page is within the scope of the Wikipedia Help Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's help documentation for readers and contributors. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. To browse help related resources see the Help Menu or Help Directory. Or ask for help on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you there.Wikipedia HelpWikipedia:Help ProjectTemplate:Wikipedia Help ProjectHelp
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics
The IPA is gibberish and I can't read it. Why doesn't Wikipedia use a normal pronunciation key?
The IPA is the international standard for phonetic transcription, and therefore the Wikipedia standard as well. Many non-American and/or EFL-oriented dictionaries and pedagogical texts have adopted the IPA, and as a result, it is far less confusing for many people around the world than any alternative. It may be confusing in some aspects to some English speakers, but that is precisely because it is conceived with an international point of view. The sound of y in "yes" is spelled /j/ in the IPA, and this was chosen from German and several other languages which spell this sound j.
For English words, Wikipedia does use a "normal" pronunciation key. It is Help:Pronunciation respelling key, and may be used in addition to the IPA, enclosed in the {{respell}} template. See the opening sentences of Beijing, Cochineal, and Lepidoptera for a few examples. But even this is not without problems; for example, cum laude would be respelled kuum-LOW-day, but this could easily be misread as koom-LOH-day. English orthography is simply too inconsistent in regard to its correspondence to pronunciation, and therefore a completely intuitive respelling system is infeasible. This is why our respelling system must be used merely to augment the IPA, not to replace it.
Wikipedia deals with a vast number of topics from foreign languages, and many of these languages contain sounds that do not exist in English. In these cases, a respelling would be entirely inadequate. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Pronunciation for further discussion.
@JacktheBrown I agree. The chart is totally useless. I did try to save it in the hope that I will someday decipher it, but all the words and signs mean nothing to me at all. I am constantly being frustrated by phonetic spellings that mean nothing. How does a person go about learning them? 2604:3D09:8878:4500:5170:2E8B:73DC:84E5 (talk) 15:55, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Some missing letters.
Hi, I'm JakGuy and I want to say that ɞ, e̞ (ɛ̝), o̞ (ɔ̝), ɤ̞ (ʌ̝), and others are missing. I think someone would add them in the future!!! Do you agree? JakGuy1 (talk) 21:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! As I remember, the font "Andika" misrendered the letter "unrounded open frontal vowel" /a/ as an "unrounded open rearial vowel" /ɑ/. Just for information. Sorry if I wrong. Thank you... 114.4.214.195 (talk) 09:03, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a native English speaker, and I dispute the claim that the two 'b' sound different. To my ear there is absolutely no phonetic difference. The pronunciation is like 'lab-amber', the same as 'bamboo', 'Barbarella' etc. I don't think it is a very good example. Perhaps a clearer, more distinct example can be found to better illustrate the point being made. 179.180.80.100 (talk) 13:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I'm not sure what that sentence is supposed to mean, especially since la bamba is a well-known phrase in English and the song title has long been nativized/anglicized. Wolfdog (talk) 15:13, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]