|
Gość
|
|
 Wysłany: Czw Paź 28, 2010 5:18 pm |
|
 |
 |
|
|
Dla tego filozofa greckiego bejotki, który twierdził, że transkrypcja jest zbędna w bazach.
Virtually all software dictionaries nowadays have audio recordings. If you can listen to a native speaker pronouncing a word, do you still need written pronunciations? Yes, for four reasons:
* Your ears are not perfect. Even if the dictionary has high-quality recordings, it is always good to see all the sounds in a word. Sometimes you hear a "t"; then somebody tells you it should be a "d", and then you start hearing a "d".
* Recordings are never perfect. No matter how high the quality of recordings, there are always some bad ones. For example, here is the recording for the word back from the Collins COBUILD Advanced Learner's Dictionary. Not very clear, is it? Phonetic transcription (/bæk/) is always clear, because it represents each English sound with a different symbol.
* Dictionaries often have more transcriptions than recordings. For example, the transcriptions may show two ways to pronounce a word, but the recording will show only one. Or a dictionary may have British and American transcriptions, but only British recordings.
* Reading a transcription is faster than clicking a button and listening to a recording.
Źródło: http://www.antimoon.com/
|
|
|
