User talk:Contorista

Welcome!

Hi Contorista! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Nardog (talk) 23:49, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. At this time, I will limit myself to those things I feel I can do, and which may make sense to contribute, thus will possibly enhance my acting radius cautiously only. And learning how-to's in advance just isn't my style. I know that, given how our system works, this puts me in a position of disadvantage. But you do not have to slam me for that. On the contrary, if you adapt to some degree, you might even draw some profit for yourselves. Contorista (talk) 01:13, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Care to explain, "some profit for yourselves?" -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:35, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

The page User:Contorista has been deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion-- promotional content.. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not a venue for promoting any subject. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thanks, -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:33, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is my personal website, where I present myself and interests of mine like anyone else does. How dare you mischaracterise, let alone delete it? It looks like a vicious bureaucratic act to me, and I reject and rebuke your authoritarian behaviour. Is there a way to appeal your measure? But it must be people that you are not allied with, in other words: There should be a reason for me to trust them. Contorista (talk) 21:45, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ådalen

Hi, how do you know Ådalen is pronounced [ˈoːˌdɑlən]? And what language is it a transcription of? If it is Swedish, can you tell me which tone the first syllable has? (And you should refrain from calling other editors trolls if you want to continue editing collaboratively on this site.) Nardog (talk) 07:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can speak swedish. Also, swedish has - like most other european languages, and in contrast to english - regular pronunciation rules, so in most cases there is no doubt: Once you've learned these rules, you apply them on what you read, and your chances to get it right are near 100 %.

The other questions seem to indicate that you so far have not had contact with the IPA script. As it is the global standard to indicate pronunciation for all languages, may I suggest you take an hour or so (it shouldn't take much more) to familiarise yourself with its principles and primary signs - which are the vowel and a few consonant conventions (there are many more which you can safely ignore for everyday use). To better understand its raison d'être, maybe it would make sense if you started here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Great_Vowel_Shift#The_linguistic_knowledge_level_displayed_by_some_of_the_commentariat_here_is_truly_remarkable - this should be the last comment on the 'talk' page of the article 'Great Vowel Shift'.

Finally, to facilitate the approach for you, here's a short answer to the one of your questions that has not been discussed yet: The emphasis in the IPA script is indicated by [ˈ] and [ˌ] (re the syllable they precede) - the first-mentioned sign indicating the primary (stronger), the other a secondary (weaker) stress where applicable. This latter is less frequent in english than other germanic languages, but should be found in fx Newcastle, if pronounced correctly. So you might actually add the [ˌ] into [ˈnjuːkɑːsəl] at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcastle_upon_Tyne , such that it becomes [ˈnjuːˌkɑːsəl]

Regarding my 'name-calling', your over-the-top erasure reaction (reminding of 'shoot first, ask questions later') seemed to indicate such a provenience. I also used to virtually know an individual - and having a similar handle as yours - who stalked me for months, just because he couldn't tolerate me talking (in a calm and objective manner) about things he wished not to become common knowledge. I am not willing to abandon my basic rights just because others don't like to see me using them. Obviously, I do not look for trouble and would be pleased to see that it all was just a missunderstanding. Contorista (talk) 08:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you speak Swedish, then you must know that anden meaning "the duck" (or "the mallard") and anden meaning "the spirit" are both pronounced with the same sequence of phonemes, /anden/, and with primary stress on the first syllable, and differ only in prosody. My understanding is that although which words have which tones is predictable by morphological structure to some extent, it is not entirely so. So which tone/accent does Ådalen have, the "the duck" type or the "the spirit" type? Nardog (talk) 09:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting what you say there. In your previous question you indicated that you couldn't speak swedish, not even recognise it - why else would you have asked '... what language is it a transcription of'. Now you ask a very detailed question re a random swedish 'homonym' (in this specific case of the definite article) and its pronunciation, or possible pronunciation nuances depending on which meaning it may have in a given situation, that go far beyond what the average (and even above-average) foreign learner of swedish would have to worry about. I've learned a number of languages and have never been officially confronted with what you call prosody issues, nor would anyone communicating with me have taken palpable offence with tiny deficits originating there. I got to know them during advanced private studies but did soon realise that this is nothing to break my head over during everyday (thus non-academic) use. Why do you want readers of these general encyclopedia articles to confront with something clearly not essential?

So you have a knowledge of swedish, is this correct? To what extent? But why then did you pretend not to have any? Why did you unilaterally erase my IPA transcription of Ådalen although you must have seen that it is correct, or basically correct, and giving this exaggerated justification ('tone missing') which you must know is of no significance for far more than 99 % of users - only for (I would assume) post-BA swedish linguists? And even if it were essential (as you pretend to), why did you then not just 'add the missing part' - in other words be constructive instead of destructive? Are you sure you are not the individual that used to stalk me, see previous response? Or is there another agenda you in reality are pursuing, and that you'd better come clean about, in the interest of a fair interaction? It should be comprehensible that I won't deliver any more bona fide contributions in this context if this issue isn't cleared up, and without leaving a bad aftertaste. And take your time, we're not in a hurry. Contorista (talk) 10:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I asked what language it was a transcription of precisely because you didn't indicate the tone. It was a leading question. In fact I asked If it is Swedish, can you tell me which tone the first syllable has?, specifically linking to Swedish phonology#Stress and pitch, which explains what I explained above. That you construed it as indicating "that you couldn't speak swedish, not even recognise it" is entirely of your own making.

Saying the tone is of little importance is like saying the difference between hit and heat or between insight and incite is of little importance in English. Many learners of English have a hard time grasping these differences, but they can perfectly get by speaking English without realizing the differences because there's usually enough context to understand them and it's impolite to point it out on each occasion. But that of course doesn't mean it's fine for an encyclopedia such as this one to transcribe hit and heat or insight and incite the same, because for native speakers they are not homophones.

I'm sorry you had to go through that experience, but your insinuation comes out of nowhere. You don't have "basic rights" to accuse people of wrongdoing without evidence—editing Wikipedia is a privilege, not a right. If you cannot contribute constructively and collaboratively, you will be shown the door, and that's not going to be pleasant for anyone, including you. I have no agenda other than to improve and maintain the quality of the encyclopedia, especially relating to phonetics and phonology—if you clicked my username I think you'd get at least some idea that I care about these topics. Nardog (talk) 12:24, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you contest an obvious truth:

In an article about a name-given swedish locality, we can assume that we are dealing with a swedish name ?

That is so common-sensical that no further explanation should be required, yet you keep asking what language it is. And on top as someone who apparently speaks swedish. And even if your concern were valid: Instead of asking me about my upgrade, or 'correcting' it, you just delete it, giving a hardly understandable justification. How can 'no pronunciation given' in an article be better than one which is essentially right? Your acting looks arbitrary, and you seem to agree, because you keep avoiding answering the doubts that have been raised by your behaviour. And which author in his right mind wouldn't feel provoked by that? Yet you don't acknowledge this and end it there, but keep going. This kind of behaviour - irrespective of how we may call it - is not making you any friends, no matter how long you have been around at WP and how important you are.

I have not studied IPA on an academic level, but it was taught/used in school, and I have years of practical experience with it, in a number of european languages. So I consider myself qualified enough to make educated IPA guesses in most european languages, especially in a medium made by laymen like WP. If you fx go to

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elverum

and check my recent IPA update there (version history), then you will see the formula 'best effort' which I added this time (although it shouldn't be necessary): If it isn't quite right, it still is something we can live with until someone comes who might know even better, and who obviously is invited to improve it. Isn't this the working principle at WP, unless I'm mistaken? May I also benefit from this arrangement, or should i be punished by deletion? I really believe that a close to 100 % IPA pronunciation (and open to improvement) is far better than no pronunciation given (or sound file only, or 'respelt' and other methods).

Also the other argument you come up with this time (again) makes little sense. That the accent 1/2 phenomenon in swedish

https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordaccent#Accent_i_svenskan

cannot be compared (as you do) to a very fundamental thing as is the short/open vowels versus long/closed ones, like fx (english) sin - seen (which of course must be kept/told apart, and is easily done), is self-evident. Accent 1/2 is related to the danish stød

https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/St%C3%B8d_(lingvistik) ,

so the following (already said earlier) is true for both of them: That is not something to worry about for average (or even above-average) foreign language learners, only for students preparing for their MA exam and such. Everyday danes have no real trouble to tell the difference between spoken fx hun and hund, even if the foreign speaker misplaces or omits the stød. (And they'd better not, because there are regions in Denmark where the stød doesn't exist.) Our attention was drawn to its existence when I learned danish, but it was made clear that it wasn't essential. During the swedish lessons, they didn't even mention the accent 1/2 part, we later had to find out for ourselves - so 'important' is it apparently in everyday situations involving a foreigner - and also here (like in Denmark), swedes from certain regions don't use it. Clearly WP as a general encyclopedia does not have the ambition to be on the highest academic level (as can be seen in many articles), thus why should we treat accent 1/2 or stød differently. Yet you should feel invited to add the appropriate IPA marks in these situations whenever you find them omitted, instead of deleting without replacement the previous version.

So there wasn't really anything new today, just more of the same. Sorry I do not feel like investing more time and energy in debates I must consider redundant, and I hope that, should we ever meet again, it will be under more propitious auspices. Contorista (talk) 04:13, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistics

On at least two pages recently, you have posted ranty screeds about linguistic matters, both of which were factually wrong and which had no reliable sources in support of them anyway. Please refrain from angrily lecturing at other editors, about a language you are apparently not native speaker of (all indications are that you're Italian), as it is disruptive noise, and Wikipedia is not a forum for venting opinions or proposing your own novel ideas about historical events like the Great English Vowel shift. See also Dunning–Kruger effect. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 10:25, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Nardog (talk) 03:23, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 03:35, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To expound on the block, not only is this comment inappropriate, most of your contributions appear to be WP:NOTFORUM posts done to disparage English speakers. Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 03:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]