What you are asking about is called "allophonic variation" in linguistics: It is the phenomenon that the same phoneme is usually pronounced in slightly different ways depending on context.
In Esperanto, allophonic variation also exists, though unlike in other language, it is never obligatory, and it tends to be quite small. One example of a small ...
Your question is mainly about how to deal with foreign names in Esperanto, especially if they contain a sound that does not closely match one of the 28 sounds of Esperanto. The Akademio de Esperanto published a recommendation about dealing with foreign names in Esperanto.
This recommendation distinguishes three different ways of dealing with foreign names ...
Fakte estas du demandoj: kiel literumi tiujn literojn kaj kiel elparoli Esperantece tiujn literojn.
PMEG respondas al ambaŭ demandoj. Mi provas sube resumi tiujn respondojn.
Kiel literumi tiujn literojn :
Q q : kuo
X x : ikso
Y y : ipsilono
W w : duobla vo, Ĝermana vo, vavo, vuo°
Ekzemple, oni literumas "exchange" tiel : e ikso co ho a no go ...
In Fundamento de Esperanto is stated how the r should be pronounced in several languages. In the French and German ones it is simply stated that the r be pronounced as the regular r in those languages. This can be a variety of things, but usually is a uvular approximant or fricative [ʁ] or [ʁ̝], or a uvular trill [ʀ] (all voiced).
In the Polish and Russian ...
In short: ĝ and ĉ are not the same as dĵ and tŝ, but it does not really matter.
Long version: There is a a class of consonants called affricates: they consist of a plosive (e.g. t) and a sibilant (e.g. s) with same place of articulation and same voicing. In Esperanto the affricates are c, ĉ, ĝ, German for instance has pf. ks is not an affricate, but two ...
The most important grammatical references, PMEG and PAG (Plena Analiza Gramatiko), both recommend R to be pronounced as an alveolar trill [r] (i.e. trilled with the tip of the tongue). PMEG says that a uvular trill [R] (like the French R) is also acceptable.
Apperently Zamenhof himself was not very strict about this. In the five version of the grammar rules ...
The English word for the language Esperanto is ‘Esperanto’ (written the same). The pronunciation of the English word for the language is given in the English Wikipedia. Just like how the name for the country France is written the same in English and in French, but pronounced differently. The English pronunciation in no way dictates how the word be pronounced ...
I am not sure what people you are talking about, because this is the kind of detail that varies a lot depending on the native language of the speaker (e.g. a French speaker may pronounce o more open if followed by a consonant at the end of syllable).
In theory, o should always have the same pronunciation, whatever its position in the word is. It should be a ...
I guess you got terrible sources. :/
You just have to check the Fundamento for this:
In the English fundamento, ĥ is defined as in loch, which is /x/
In the German fundamento, ĥ is defined as "ch". I think that "ch" in German is mostly /x/ like in nacht.Sternchen looks like an oddity.
In the French fundamento, r is defined as the french r, which is /ʁ/, ...
The whole point of J and Ŭ in Esperanto is to make it very clear whether it's one syllable or two. The vowels are just A, E, I, O, U; the second-to-last is stressed (marked with ´ in the examples below):
balái (ba-lá-i, a verb), bálaj (bá-laj, an adjective) — That's why we use J for plurals and not I.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-SAMPA but slightly simplified to leave out the diacritical marks on the vowels.
Esperanto IFA/IPA SAMPA
a a a
b b b
c t͡s ts
I think if someone is pronouncing konas to sound like the English words “cone ass” then they are basically making a mistake. It’s probably quite common for English native speakers to do this at the end of words (I do it too sadly), but it’s best avoided if possible. All of the vowels should ideally sound the same in any position. If it seems to you like “...
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.
Mi provis trovi kiel eble plej senchavajn minimumajn parojn. Jen la rezultoj de mia serĉado:
pred·ĵet·o / preĝ·et·o
vend·ĵet·o / venĝ·et·o
pint·ŝat·a / pinĉ·at·a
sort·ŝat·a / sorĉ·at·a
koment·sem·a / komenc·em·a
plat·sem·a / plac·em·a
Notu, ke malgraŭ la supraĵa simileco inter "koment·sem·a" kaj "plat·sem·a", ili fakte estas tute ...
According to the PMEG, it's an acceptable alteration:
Kiam N staras antaŭ gingiva aŭ vela sono, oni emas ŝanĝi N en gingivan
sonon (malgranda diferenco), aŭ velan sonon (granda diferenco), por
faciligi la elparolon: tranĉi, manĝi, longa, banko k.a. Tio estas
senproblema, ĉar ne ekzistas gingiva aŭ vela nazaj sonoj, kun kiuj N
There is no official way to laugh in Esperanto. I have read everything from ha ha ha, ahahaha, ĥaĥaĥa but the most common by far (in Telegram) is "hahaha". It sounds like "hahaha".
Note: I do see a lot of "ĥaĥaĥa" in some Facebook groups. Is there a portugese/spanish influence?
The IPA pronunciation seems to be /ʈ͡ʂʊ˥ŋwə˧˥n/. I will have to ignore the tones, since I don't see any way to clearly transliterate these.
The first sound /ʈ͡ʂ/ is closest to /t͡ʃ/, so this would be ⟨ĉ⟩. The vowel /ʊ/ is closest to /u/ in Esperanto, so ⟨u⟩. Since /ŋ/ only could occur before /ɡ/ or /k/ in Esperanto you can choose to transliterate it as ⟨ng⟩,...
Searching Tekstaro for “oi”, I found a lot of examples of words with that vowel combination. Here are some examples:
As for pronounciation, as usual in Esperanto, it is “read what you see”. :) That is, it should be clear that it is “o” then “i”. One should not read it as if it was “oj” but I cannot ...
Zamenhof did not explicitly define a standard pronunciation in detail. Nevertheless, a detailed pronunciation norm naturally emerged as Esperanto became a language used in speech for international communication.
This is described very well by the article Prononco de Esperanto in the Esperanto Wikipedia. The claims in the article are backed up by citations ...
Not to my knowledge for SAMPA. Tables of SAMPA transcriptions exist for several languages, and one for Esperanto should be easy to construct. An example for English is here: http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/sampa/english.htm
The main page for SAMPA is at http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/sampa/index.html
An IPA table can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/...
As Marcos Cramer answered, there are three options:
Making it into a normal Esperanto name. Would Patko or Putko work? I know that they are vocatives in Bulgarian, but that's perhaps not the first thing that comes to your mind if it is said in the context of another language.
Adapting it partially to the Esperanto phonology:
P'tka, suggested in another ...
It's just my guess, but I think Zamenhof wanted to find a compromise between conflicting principles:
the written form of the roots should be recognisable,
one letter should unambiguously correspond to one sound.
"Akvo" comes from Latin "aqua". Words such as "aqueduct" are written "акведук" in Russian, "akwedukt" in Polish, and written with "kv" in most ...
It is important and you should not neglect it, if only because your audience is diverse, and while some will be able to ignore the stress, others will get distracted by it. However, there's little danger of real misunderstanding, perhaps with compound words one would parse the beginning as a separate two-syllable word for instance vivokazaĵo as vivo kazaĵo, ...