Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm University How do Swedish encyclopedia users want pronuncia- tion to be presented? Michaël Stenberg Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University Abstract were four introductory questions about age and linguistic background. In order to evaluate the This paper about presentation of pronunciation questions, a pilot test was first made, with five in Swedish encyclopedias is part of a doctoral participants: library and administrative staff, dissertation in progress. It reports on a panel and students of linguistics, though not special- survey on how users view presentation of pro- izing in phonetics. This pilot test, conducted in nunciation by transcriptions and recordings, March 2009, resulted in some of the questions so-called audio pronunciations. The following being revised for the sake of clarity. main issues are dealt with: What system should The survey proper was carried out in be used to render stress and segments? For March―April 2009. Fifty-four subjects be- what words should pronunciation be given tween 19 and 80 years of age, all of them affili- (only entry headwords or other words as well)? ated to Lund University, were personally ap- What kind of pronunciation should be present- proached. No reward was offered for parti- ed (standard vs. local, original language vs. cipating. Among them were librarians, admi- swedicized)? How detailed should a phonetic nistrative staff, professors, researchers and stu- transcription be? How should ‘audio pronunci- dents. Their academic studies comprised Lin- ations’ be recorded (human vs. synthetic guistics (including General Linguistics and speech, native vs. Swedish speakers, male vs. Phonetics) Logopedics, Audiology, Semiology, female speakers)? Results show that a clear Cognitive Science, English, Nordic Langua- majority preferred IPA transcriptions to ‘re- ges, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Polish, spelled pronunciation’ given in ordinary or- Russian, Latin, Arabic, Japanese, Translation thography. An even vaster majority (90%) did Program, Comparative Literature, Film Studies, not want stress to be marked in entry head- Education, Law, Social Science, Medicine, words but in separate IPA transcriptions. Only Biology and Environmental Science. A majori- a small number of subjects would consider us- ty of the subjects had Swedish as their first ing audio pronunciations made up of synthetic language; however, the following languages speech. were also represented: Norwegian, Dutch, Ger- man, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Introduction Bulgarian and Hebrew. In spite of phonetic transcriptions having been The average time for filling in the 11-page used for more than 130 years to show pro- questionnaire was 20 minutes. Each question nunciation in Swedish encyclopedias, very little had 2―5 answer options. As a rule, only one of is known about the users’ preferences and their them should be marked, but for questions opinion of existing methods of presenting pro- where more than one option was chosen, each nunciation. I therefore decided to procure infor- subject’s score was evenly distributed over the mation on this. Rather than asking a random options marked. Some follow-up questions sample of more than 1,000 persons, as in were not to be answered by all subjects. In a customary opinion polls, I chose to consult a small number of cases, questions were mista- smaller panel of persons with a high probability kenly omitted. The percentage of answers for a of being experienced users of encyclopedias. certain option has always been based on the This meant a qualitative metod and more quali- actual number of subjects who answered each fied questions than in a mass survey. question. For many of the questions, an oppor- tunity for comments was provided. In a few cases, comments made by subjects have led to Method reinterpretation of their answers, i.e., if the A questionnaire made up of 24 multiple choice choice of a given option does not coincide with questions was compiled. Besides these, there Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm University a comment on it, the answer has been inter- examples of systems for marking stress in entry preted in accordance with the comment. headings are given. However, subjects showed a strong tendency to dislike having stress Questions and results marked in entry headings. As many as 90% favoured a separate IPA transcription instead. The initial question concerned the main motive According to the comments made, the reason for seeking pronunciation advice in encyclope- was that they did not want the image of the dias. As might have been expected, a vast ma- orthograpic word to be disturbed by signs that jority, 69%, reported that they personally want- could possibly be mistaken for diacritics. ed to know the pronunciation of items they Table 1 shows five different ways of were looking up, but, interestingly enough, for marking stress in orthographic words that the 13%, the reason was to resolve disputes about panel had to evaluate. The corresponding IPA pronunciation. Others used the pronunciation transcriptions of the four words would be advice to feel more secure in company or to [noˈbɛl], [ˈmaŋkəl], [ˈramˌløːsa] and [ɧaˈmɑːn]. prepare themselves for speaking in public. When it came to the purpose of the advice given, almost half of the subjects (44%) wanted Table 1. Examples of systems for marking main it to be descriptive (presenting one or more ex- stress in orthographic words: (a) IPA system as used by Den Store Danske Encyklopædi, (b) Na- isting pronunciations). The other options were tionalencyklopedin & Nordisk Familjebok 2nd edn. prescriptive and guiding, the latter principle be- system, (c) SAOL (Swedish Academy Wordlist), ing adopted by several modern encyclopedias. Svensk uppslagsbok & NE:s ordbok system, (d) Bra For entries consisting of personal names, a Böckers lexikon & Lexikon 2000 system, (e) Brock- striking majority, 97%, wanted pronunciation haus, Meyers & Duden Aussprachewörterbuch sys- to be given not only for second (family) names, tem.1 but also for first names, at least for persons who are always referred to by both names. This re- (a) Noˈbel ˈMankell ˈRamlösa schaˈman sult is quite contrary to the prevalent tradition (b) Nobe´l Ma´nkell Ra´mlösa schama´n in Sweden, where pronunciation is provided ex- (c) Nobel´ Man´kell Ram´lösa schama´n clusively for second names. Somewhat surpris- (d) Nobel Mankell Ramlösa schaman ingly, a majority of 69% wanted pronunciation (e) Nobel Mankell Ramlösa schama̱n (or stress) only to be given for entry headings, not for scientific terms mentioned later. Of the In case stress was still to be marked in entry remaining 31%, however, 76% wanted stress to headings, the subjects’ preferences for the be marked in scientific terms, e.g., Calendula above systems were as follows: officinalis, mentioned either initially only or also further down in the article text. (a) : 51 % (b) : 11 % Notation of prosodic features (c) : 9 % The next section covered stress and tonal fea- (d) : 6 % tures. 46% considered it sufficient to mark (e) : 20 % main stress, whereas main plus secondary stress was preferred by 31%. The rest demanded even As the figures show, this meant a strong sup- a third degree of stress to be featured. Such a port for IPA, whereas three of the systems system has been used in John Wells’s Longman widely used in Sweden were largely dismissed. Pronunciation Dictionary, but was abandoned System (e) is a German one, used in works with with its 3rd edition (2008). Max Mangold in the board of editors. It has the 70% of the subjects wanted tonal features to same economic advantages as (c), and is well be dipslayed, and 75% of those thought suited for Swedish, where quantity is comple- Swedish accent 1 and 2 and the corresponding mentary distributed between vowels and conso- Norwegian tonelag features would suffice to be nants in stressed syllables. System (d), which shown. does not account for quantity, can be seen as a A number of systems for marking stress simplification of (e). It seems to have been in- exist, both within phonetic transcriptions in troduced in Sweden by Bra Böckers Lexikon, a square brackets and outside these, in words very widespread Swedish encyclopedia, having written in normal orthography. In table 1 the Danish work Lademanns Leksikon as its Proceedings, FONETIK 2009, Dept. of Linguistics, Stockholm University model, published from 1973 on and now super- local. Like loanwords, many foreign geogra- seded by Lexikon 2000. The only Swedish en- phical names, e.g., Hamburg, London, Paris, cyclopedia where solely IPA transcriptions in Barcelona, have obtained a standard, swedi- brackets are used appears to be Respons (1997 cized pronunciation, whereas other ones, some- —8), a minor work of c. 30,000 entries, which times—but not always—less well-known, e.g., is an adaptation of the Finnish Studia, aimed at Bordeaux, Newcastle, Katowice, have not. The young people. Its pronunciation system is, how- panel was asked how to treat the two types of ever, conceived in Sweden. names. A majority, 69% wanted a swedicized It ought to be mentioned that SAOB (Sven- pronunciation, if established, to be given, other- ska Akademiens ordbok), the vast dictionary of wise the original pronunciation. However, the the Swedish language, which began to be pub- remaining 31% would even permit the editors lished in 1898 (sic!) and is still under edition, themselves to invent a pronunciation con- uses a system of its own. The above examples sidered easier for speakers of Swedish in would be represented as follows: nåbäl3, ‘difficult’ cases where no established swedi- maŋ4kel, ram3lø2sa, ʃama4n. The digits 1—4 fications exist, like Łódź and Poznań. Three represent different degrees of stress and are subjects commented that they wanted both the placed in the same way as the stress marks in original and swedicized pronunciation to be system (c) above, their position thus denoting given for Paris, Hamburg, etc.