What do you think of conlangs (that are not jokelangs) that don't use the IPA to define their phonology? I don't like them, because using such a system is inconsistent, and also, some people don't know to imitate accents!
What do you think of conlangs (that are not jokelangs) that don't use the IPA to define their phonology? I don't like them, because using such a system is inconsistent, and also, some people don't know to imitate accents!
Same
It's a sign of being new to the craft. A common pitfall is saying something like "pronounced like the 'a' in man" when that could mean [a], [æ] or [ɛə]. But be nice, because we were all new once.
I don't mind it, because some people might 1: not understand how IPA works or 2: not have discovered IPA yet.
Why being mean to new conlangers huh?!
@The Great Otter I just don't like it when phonologies of conlangs are described without the IPA, I'm not being mean to new conlangers, just saying my opinion
@Ralsei floof Yea, so, if you are new to conlanging, and haven't learned the IPA yet, then just learn it before making your first conlang
@Beltonia yea, it just irritates me for some reason, a pet peeve if you will
What do you think?