Talk:Trisyllabic laxing

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Phonetics Task Force.

English Language Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject English Language, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the English language on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.English LanguageWikipedia:WikiProject English LanguageTemplate:WikiProject English LanguageEnglish Language articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

syllabification

why is onset-maximization not applied in the syllabified IPA-transcription?

fixed, with better examples – ishwar (speak) 23:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exceptions

Are there sources to say this doesn't occur with the inflectional suffixes -ed, -es, -ing, -ly, and -est, or with any meaning of -er (laborer), or in modern compounds (cowpuncher, tidewater). Also, there are more -ational words with the tense vowel than with the lax one. And there must be a better example than scholarly, unless scholar was once trisyallabic. Maybe gossamer? —JerryFriedman (Talk) 22:27, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

list?

....and serene/serenity.

Should we have a list of these, as at initial-stress-derived noun? Or would this one be too long? Michael Hardy (talk) 16:22, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

appear → apparent

"appear → apparent" does not seem to fit any of the six patterns now listed here. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:52, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

pro-

The pronunciations of "provoke", "pronounce" and "profound" are just wrong here. Was this article put together by an L2 learner? Each of these words has the "schwa" neutral vowel in the pro- syllable. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.135.13.194 (talk) 15:28, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Provoke" generally has a schwa vowel if pronounced in the middle of a connected sentence, but if the word is pronounced in isolation or emphatically, the first syllable can become "semi-stressed" (as it is sometimes called), and has a briefer or less diphthongal form of the long-o vowel (at least in American English). AnonMoos (talk) 10:08, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]