Famous Books written in IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet)

onurkutlualp

New Member
Turkish
Hello everyone,
Recently I decided to improve my accent. Can we find famous books or movie scripts written in the IPA (lnternational Phonetic Alphabet)? Thank you very much in advance.
 
  • Ponyprof

    Senior Member
    Canadian English
    Hello everyone,
    Recently I decided to improve my accent. Can we find famous books or movie scripts written in the IPA (lnternational Phonetic Alphabet)? Thank you very much in advance.
    I doubt there is any such thing. Native English speakers rarely know IPA unless they are linguistics scholars.

    Listening to recorded speech and recording your own speech is probably more useful.
     

    Chasint

    Senior Member
    English - England

    Alice's Adventures in Wonderland: An edition printed in the International Phonetic Alphabet Paperback – 21 Dec. 2014​


    1618502326190.png
     
    Last edited:

    onurkutlualp

    New Member
    Turkish
    Tank yo Chasint and Pnyprof for your answers.
    I also saw "Alice Adventures on Wonderland" on internet. But that's the only one. I couldn't find any other books or movie scripts. But thank you so muchfor your answer. I it's the only one I will take it.
     

    kentix

    Senior Member
    English - U.S.
    Native speakers don't use IPA. It's hard to imagine anyone putting a movie script into IPA. It would be a lot of time and effort for nothing.

    But now you have an idea for a website.
     

    kentix

    Senior Member
    English - U.S.
    With so many backwards letters my eyes can't decide which direction to go. That's my overall impression, too. It's going right to left.

    Weird.
     

    Myridon

    Senior Member
    English - US
    For rhotic speakers, the book is about adventchas in wandaland.
    I listened to a fantasy audio book read by a British speaker in which both Law and Lore fit the context. The IPA book might not clear this up.

    I think I my "native" is much closer to a /t/ than my "putting".
     

    entangledbank

    Senior Member
    English - South-East England
    Curiouser and curiouser. Google Translate offers me Vietnamese for the Dorothy Parker linked in #19. I can understand the automatic transcriber in #7 getting some things wrong (after all, 'putting' with /ʌ/ is spelt 'putting'), but how on earth did it get those transcriptions for 'for' and 'website' and 'but'?

    An automatic transcriber is not much use for a learner. Well, let's say none. Any learner who knows IPA probably also knows the basics of English pronunciation and how to use a dictionary. What they need is the pronunciations of less familiar or more difficult words - precisely the ones that don't fit the rules (such as they are) and that therefore the transcriber gets wrong.
     

    kentix

    Senior Member
    English - U.S.
    One other pedantic point. It should probably be written with the IPA alphabet. The books are still written in English, even if they are printed/displayed with the IPA alphabet.
     

    Myridon

    Senior Member
    English - US
    If we're being pedantic, IPA isn't an alphabet by the definition used in other threads recently. (Recite the letters in order if you can.) It's a script, I think.
     

    dojibear

    Senior Member
    AE (US English)
    IPA represents sounds. English speakers in different places use different sounds. We call that "different accents". It is not just Britain, America, Australia and India. Even in the US, speakers from Boston, Texas and Georgia sound very different when they say the same words. You would need different IPA texts for these speakers.

    Worse, English writing is not phonetic. The sound (the IPA spelling) is the same for word groups "two/too/to" but the meaning is different. There are hundreds of word groups like this.
     
    Last edited:

    elroy

    Imperfect mod
    US English, Palestinian Arabic bilingual
    Ah, I hadn't noticed!

    There are other imperfections, though:
    • "use": the consonant is /z/ not /s/ (I guess this is because the word was treated as a noun and not a verb.)
    • "IPA": this is an acronym; there's no such word as /ɪpɑː/! (I guess the tool is not equipped to handle acronyms.)
    • "putting": wrong first vowel. Actually, /pʌtɪŋ/ does exist, as a form of the verb " to putt," but that's infinitely less common so it's odd that the tool would use that as the default!
    • "a": This was treated as the letter of the alphabet as opposed to the indefinite article! Again, the latter is exponentially more common!
    • "but": The "t" is definitely pronounced, either fully released or unreleased. With the possible exception of regional variants, no one says /bʌ/.
    And a question:
    • "for": Is it really /ɜ/ in British English?
     
    Last edited:

    Red Arrow

    Senior Member
    Dutch - Belgium
    IPA represents sounds. English speakers in different places use different sounds. We call that "different accents". It is not just Britain, America, Australia and India. Even in the US, speakers from Boston, Texas and Georgia sound very different when they say the same words. You would need different IPA texts for these speakers.
    IIPA can and is also used for phonemic transcriptions, not just phonetic transcriptions. Of course, some words still have different phonemes depending on the accent ("bath" with A like in "father" or with A like in "cat") but this is solved by having both a British and an American option. Other accents of English have more or less / exactly the same phonemes as one of these two.
     

    kentix

    Senior Member
    English - U.S.
    But there are multiple pronunciations of many words within the U.S., too. The idea of an "American" option is a bit of a fantasy. Seeing the traditional spelling let's everyone know what the word is, however they pronounce it. IPA spelling would require that somebody (millions of people actually) would see a word spelled in a way that didn't match their experience. It wouldn't be, in principle, different from the current system.

    USA Family 1:
    "Go ahead, son. Read the IPA. That's how you say that word."

    USA Family 2:
    "Yes, son, I know it's spelled (transcribed?) that way in your book, but here's how you really say it."

    And these individual pronunciations don't form discrete groups, by region for instance. Different words overlap regions in individual ways. There is no simple on/off switch you can use. And that is not even taking into account mergers. Mary, marry and merry are three different pronunciations for some people and all the same for others. How are you going to spell/transcribe those for the entire country?

    Logically, you reach a point where the only solution is that your "spelling" system forces you to change how you speak. But that seems like putting the cart before the horse. Is a writing system a tool we use or one that uses us to do its bidding?

    It reminds me of the situation where computers, especially with numbers, are essentially forcing people to conform to their logic and style. Every time someone writes a month or day with a leading zero, a computer terrorist has won. :D
     
    Last edited:

    Ben Jamin

    Senior Member
    Polish
    It would be best for you to buy some audiobooks. And remember: English is not really one language, it occurs in thousands of dialects and accents from New Zealand to Alaska, many of them very distinct from the English taught at courses for foreigners. Received pronunciation is also history now.
     
    I think it would be very helpful, to be able to read known passages in different alphabets. For example, I wish that there were passages transliterated from English into the Hebrew and Arabic languages. I would find it so much easier to learn them.

    Never tell anyone that their eccentric learning techniques are wrong. If they work for the individual, they're not wrong.
     

    merquiades

    Senior Member
    English (USA Northeast)
    I prefer using Merriam-Webster pronunciation symbols for English. They are easy enough that anyone can use them and they are flexible enough to adapt to different accents. For example long Ō in know, bone anyone can read the symbol and apply the precise local pronunciation of it they want, and once you get the hang of it you can write down any word easily. I find it hard to write in IPA on my own. If I write a word they way I think it should be pronounced it is almost always wrong when I check it. It's kind of mid-way between real English and a phonetic code.
     

    Ben Jamin

    Senior Member
    Polish
    I prefer using Merriam-Webster pronunciation symbols for English. They are easy enough that anyone can use them and they are flexible enough to adapt to different accents. For example long Ō in know, bone anyone can read the symbol and apply the precise local pronunciation of it they want, and once you get the hang of it you can write down any word easily. I find it hard to write in IPA on my own. If I write a word they way I think it should be pronounced it is almost always wrong when I check it. It's kind of mid-way between real English and a phonetic code.
    Where can the definitions of the Merriam-Webster pronunciation symbols be found?
     

    smb6620294

    New Member
    urdu
    I like to use the Merriam-Webster pronunciation symbol for English. They're simple enough for anyone to use, and they're flexible enough to adapt to different accents. For example, anyone who has known for a long time can read the symbol and use the exact local pronunciation they want, and once you have executed it you can write only one word. I find it difficult to write in IPA myself. When I write a word the way I think it should be pronounced, it's always wrong when I check it. It's like the middle ground between real English and voice code.
     

    Red Arrow

    Senior Member
    Dutch - Belgium
    The Merriam-Webster symbols only work for the English language, and only for phonemic transcription. It can't be used to learn another accent.
     

    merquiades

    Senior Member
    English (USA Northeast)
    The Merriam-Webster symbols only work for the English language, and only for phonemic transcription. It can't be used to learn another accent.
    No, you can't use it for another language, but it wasn't designed for that. It's perfect for English though. It's practical when looking up the pronunciation of words, and when you need to write out something phonetically.
    It does give a variety of different pronunciations when applicable.
     
    Last edited:
    Top