For example: Is it best practice to pronounce Finnlando as [fin.nlando] (like double consonants in Arabic languages) or maybe [fin:lando] (like long consonants in old Scandinavian languages) or would Finlando & Finnlando be pronounced indistinguishably?

PS: Consider Rule#9 of the 16 Rules of Esperanto Grammar: "All words are read as they are written."

  • 1
    I think Finnlando and Finlando should be pronounced differently, as per the very rule you cited. The Wiktionary pronunciation of Finnlando corroborates this statement as it treats the double n as an intensified sound. The sole exception to this rule would be non-Esperantized proper nouns, which merit deeper consideration.
    – Færd
    Jan 19, 2018 at 8:37

2 Answers 2


The answer to your question is right in your question. "All words are read as they are written." So yes, double consonants are supposed to be pronounced like two consonants. Sometimes this is not easy - which is why Suomio is a popular alternative to Finnlando.

  • Thanks, for expanding my vocabulary. I think I prefer Suomio to Finnlando. Jan 20, 2018 at 12:38

As you cite, the norm prescribes

All words are read as they are written; there are no silent letters.

From this you can conclude not only that double consonants must be pronounced, but also pronounced as two sounds instead as one long consonant. So e.g. ekkoleri should be [ɛkkɔ'lɛri] with [kk] as in Polish lekki (light), not with [k:] as in Italian vecchio (old).

While this is clear for plosives like p t k, for non-plosives like l m s the distinction between double vs. long articulation is less perceivable (I am not aware of a language distinguishing between long and double sonorants), and so an easy pronounciation like [fin:'landɔ] is certainly tolerable.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.