Talk:glutton

This came from a comment within the article:  "in 1996, spelled Wolverine, and spn = Gulo gulo -> Glutton bird (Zoöl.), the giant fulmar (Ossifraga gigantea); -- called also Mother Carey's goose, and mollymawk." --Stranger 03:36, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

abouʔ de "ʔ"
Maybe ] would be better? — Lūcifer 18:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC) Okay, revert if you dislike it. — Lūcifer 14:10, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Etymology for the wolverine animal
Wikipedia says "the wolverine's questionable reputation as an insatiable glutton (reflected in the Latin genus name Gulo) may be in part due to a false etymology. The less common name for the animal in Norwegian, fjellfross, meaning "mountain cat", is thought to have worked its way into German as Vielfraß, which means glutton (literally devours much). Its name in other West Germanic languages is similar (e.g. Dutch: veelvraat)." Equinox ◑ 16:34, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Pronunciation
@Mahagaja As a native English speaker, I added the narrow phonetic transcription [glʌʔn̩]. This corresponds to transcriptions Wiktionary already gives for button and mutton, which are perfect rhymes, and examples of that pronunciation can be heard on Forvo.

You reverted this change without giving a reason. What was it? The Nicodene (talk) 05:32, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, just because I think it's unnecessary to give narrow phonetic transcriptions in a dictionary. The fact that all English words that phonemically end in are pronounced with  (it applies to Latin, satin, mitten, kitten, and so on and so forth) means there's nothing lexical about it and therefore there's no need to list it in a dictionary entry. Also, the fact that it was the only narrow phonetic transcription might lead learners to believe it's the only correct surface pronunciation, which it isn't. Pronouncing it  with a real  instead of  is also correct, although it's more likely to be heard when someone is enunciating carefully rather than in colloquial speech. —Mahāgaja · talk 06:43, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @Mahagaja Both Latin and kitten are given narrow phonetic transcriptions, as are probably hundreds or thousands of other English words on Wiktionary. There is no policy, as far as I am aware, that justifies simply removing transcriptions because they're narrow. An additional [ˈglʌtʰən] can be added here to reflect the 'careful' pronunciation that you mention. The Nicodene (talk) 17:12, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * No, there's no policy against it, it's just a dumb thing to do and I wish people would quit it. Giving multiple narrow phonetic transcriptions that are completely predictable actually makes the pronunciation section harder for readers to understand – they can't see the forest for the trees. The [t] in the careful pronunciation isn't aspirated, incidentally, so it would be . But there would be no benefit at all to writing, because you have merely added a bunch of text without adding any actual information. And then doing so for every single word at Rhymes:English/iːtən, Rhymes:English/ɪtən, Rhymes:English/eɪtən, Rhymes:English/ætən, Rhymes:English/ætɪn, Rhymes:English/ɒtən, Rhymes:English/ɔːtən, Rhymes:English/ʌtən, Rhymes:English/ʌtɪn, Rhymes:English/əʊtən, Rhymes:English/uːtən, Rhymes:English/uːtɪn, Rhymes:English/aɪtən, Rhymes:English/aɪtɪn, Rhymes:English/aʊtən, Rhymes:English/ɜː(ɹ)tən, Rhymes:English/ɑː(ɹ)tən, Rhymes:English/ɑː(ɹ)tɪn and Rhymes:English/ɔː(ɹ)tən would be a hell of a lot of work that wouldn't improve the dictionary a jot. —Mahāgaja · talk 20:39, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @Mahagaja Well, that is what having an automated narrow transcriber would help with. I think there are benefits to adding narrow transcriptions to Wiktionary; not everyone knows English phonology well enough to divine the pronunciation [ˈɡlʌʔn̩] from /ˈɡlʌtən/. An L2 learner would benefit from learning that this is a common realization of the ending /tən/. Likewise with flapped intervocalic dentals, for instance; not everyone is a native speaker familiar with American English. I also do not see how providing this information is detrimental, even if one might find it unnecessary. The Nicodene (talk) 02:35, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It's detrimental to overwhelm people with large amounts of irrelevant data. We're a dictionary, not an ESL class; our job is to show lexical information about the word in question, not to teach people all of the intricate details of English phonology. That's just not what dictionaries are there for. —Mahāgaja · talk 06:31, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Narrow transcriptions are useful to anyone who wants to know how English words are pronounced, and even to native speakers curious about the pronunciation of other dialects. I don't see how a handful of ASCII characters (which don't even constitute a new line on the page) can be overwhelming; if someone doesn't care about pronunciation, they can skip the pronunciation section. The Nicodene (talk) 18:20, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Maybe supply all common narrow transcriptions (not just yours!) and stick them in an autocollapsed box? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 18:27, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That sounds like a good solution to me. How would one make an autocollapsed box?
 * Incidentally, the intervocalic /t/ sounds aspirated to me in careful British pronunciation. Compare the recordings for button. The Nicodene (talk) 18:50, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

edit this page and copy this: Malku H₂n̥rés (talk) 21:15, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
 * etc.
 * etc.


 * @Malku H₂n̥rés Thank you. The Nicodene (talk) 01:54, 21 August 2021 (UTC)