Talk:刣貓教猴

Using Teochew for Hailufeng Min

@Justinrleung I was just wondering what you think of using the Teochew to create Hailufeng Min entries like the one I made. Okay or not okay? Technically the tones given aren't the tones of Hailufeng Min. Mar vin kaiser (talk) 15:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

@Mar vin kaiser: I think it's controversial. We don't actually have support for Haifeng in the module, so it's misleading. There are also issues with using Guangdong romanization for Haifeng because there are some finals that are missing, such as ones with alveolar codas (/-n/ and /-t/). /-n/ is especially confusing because <-n> in Guangdong romanization indicates nasal vowels rather than an alveolar coda. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: I just learned that the current pronunciation module we have for Teochew is only accurate for the Chaozhou, Shantou, Jieyang, and Raoping dialects, and inaccurate for Chaoyang, Puning, and Huilai (and of course Hailufeng). In that case, does that mean that we can only use the current module for Chaozhou, Shantou, Jieyang, and Raoping? --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

@Mar vin kaiser: It's actually also not exactly right for Shantou because of the tone sandhi AFAIK. I think we can still use it for places like Chaoyang, Puning and Huilai since they are part of the common understanding of what is considered Teochew, but it is not exactly ideal that we haven't developed the right output for the IPA for the tone values. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:53, 4 January 2025 (UTC)