Is this a good ranscription?

[James232]

Would someone check my transcription of this text? I'm doing it according to General American pronounciation.

I don't need to indicate stress except in multisyllabic words and only primary stress at that.

Here's the text:

For many people living in one of the world's richest cities eating out has become a regular feature of life - but, as in other parts of the world, choosing just what to eat can be a problem. In recent years, a new kind of eating experience has thrived in the Brazilian city of Sao Paulo - the self-service of "kilo" restaurant. Customers pick as much as they want from a wide range of dishes then weigh their plates to find out how much they have to pay. The kilo concept has proved so popular that gourmet restaurants are beginning to adopt the idea.

Here's my attempt at transcription:

fər ˈmeniː ˈpiːpəl ˈlɪvɪŋ ˈɪn ˈwən əv ðə ˈwərldz 'rɪtʃəst ˈsɪtiːz ˈiːtɪŋ ˈˈaʊt əz bɪˈkəm ə ˈregjələr ˈfiːtʃər əv ˈlaɪf – ˈbət , əz ˈɪn ˈəðər ˈpɑrts əv ðə ˈwərld, ˈtʃuːzɪŋ ˈdʒəst ˈwʌt tə ˈiːt kən ˈbiː ə ˈprɑbləm. ˈɪn ˈriːsənt ˈjɪrz, ə ˈnuː [should this be /nʊ/?] ˈkaɪnd əv ˈiːtɪŋ ɪkˈspɪriːəns əz ˈθraɪvd ˈɪn ðə brəˈzɪljən ˈsɪtiː əv sao ‘paolo – ðə ˈselfˈsərvəs əv ˈkiːloʊ ˈrestrɑn. ˈkəstəmərz ˈpɪk əz ˈmətʃ əz ˈðeɪ ˈwɔnt ˈfrəm ə ˈwaɪd ˈreɪndʒ əv ˈdɪʃəz ˈðen ˈweɪ ðər ˈpleɪts tə ˈfaɪnd aʊt ˈhæʊ ˈmətʃ ˈðeɪ æf tə peɪ. ðə ˈkiːloʊ ˈkɑnsept həz ˈpruːvd soʊ ˈpɑpjələr ˈðət ˈgʊrˌmeɪ ˈrestrɑns ɑr bɪˈgɪnɪŋ tə əˈdɑpt ðiː aɪˈdiːə.

[Tdol]

I'm not an AmE speaker, but

ˈselfˈsərvəs looks odd to me.

[CarloSsS]

Is the weak form of one in the first sentence right? Shouldn't it be wʌn? I've never been good at this.

[nyota]

Is the weak form of one in the first sentence right? Shouldn't it be wʌn? I've never been good at this.

You definitely can't have a weak form in there anyway if it's stressed, which it is.

bɪˈkəm, ˈbət, ˈəðər, ˈwərld, ˈdʒəst - again, no schwa in a stressed syllable
tə ˈiːt --> tu ˈiːt - a weak form of 'to' before a vowel is not schwa but 'u'

ə ˈnuː [should this be /nʊ/?] - no, keep nuː
ɪkˈspɪriːəns --> ɪkˈspɪrɪəns
brəˈzɪljən --> brəˈzɪlɪən/
ˈsɪtiː - go for a weak form in an unstressed syllable --> /ˈsɪti/
ˈselfˈsərvəs --> 'selfˈsəːrvɪs
ˈrestrɑn --> 'restərɑːnt or 'restrɑːnt (in the latter 'r' should have a vertical line diacritic below it to mark that it's syllabic - at least that's one of the ways of marking it; more here: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~krussll...yllabic-r.html) and here: https://notendur.hi.is/peturk/KENNSL.../syllcons.html)
ˈkəstəmərz --> ˈkʌstəmərz (no schwa in a stressed syllable)
ˈmətʃ --> mʌtʃ
ˈwɔnt --> wɒnt (not sure if you meant the same thing)
ˈhæʊ --> haʊ
ˈðeɪ æf tə peɪ.--> həv/ əv
ˈkɑnsept həz ˈpruːvd - /əz
soʊ ˈpɑpjələr ˈðət - no stress on ðət
ðiː aɪˈdiːə - ði (it's not stressed)

[5jj]

The problem there is that some Americans use /ə/ for the sound that most British writers would transcribe as /ʌ/.

[CarloSsS]

Do the Americans use /ə/ instead of /ʌ/ only for transcription, or do they actually pronounce it differently (that is the weak for instead of the strong one)? In my example with /wʌn/, Merriam-Webster transcirbes it as /wʌn/ (Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary).

[nyota]

Do the Americans use /ə/ instead of /ʌ/ only for transcription, or do they actually pronounce it differently (that is the weak for instead of the strong one)? In my example with /wʌn/, Merriam-Webster transcirbes it as /wʌn/ (Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary).

Transcription reflects actual speech, at least it's supposed to. Regarding /wʌn/, this might interest you: John Wells’s phonetic blog: one.

[CarloSsS]

Thanks for the link, however interesting it is, it's not very relevant for me because I try to use AmE pronunciation only. Also, it says nothing about pronouncing one with schwa (ə).

The thing is, that Americans might use different symbols than the British but the actual sound could be exactly the same. All in all, I still don't know how the Americans actually pronounce it. 5 said something, Merriam-Webster's dictionary disagrees, so where's does the truth lie?

[BobK]

...
The thing is, that Americans might use different symbols than the British but the actual sound could be exactly the same. All in all, I still don't know how the Americans actually pronounce it. 5 said something, Merriam-Webster's dictionary disagrees, so where's does the truth lie?

What differs is the convention used in writing a phonemic transcription; most Br Eng speakers transcribe 'get' as /get/, whereas most American speakers transcribe it as /gɛt/. Neither is wrong, and neither is phonetically accurate. The actual vowel sound in 'get' is more open than [e], more close than [ɛ], and more central than either of those cardinal vowels. We all (or mostly, in modern texts) use the IPA, following the Principles of the International Phonetic Association - which are no doubt online somewhere. I have the book, so don't know. All I know is that many websites that claim to use the IPA use only a small subset of the symbols available, and rarely distinguish between phonetic and phonemic transcription.


b

[birdeen's call]

Transcription reflects actual speech, at least it's supposed to. Regarding /wʌn/, this might interest you: John Wells’s phonetic blog: one.

Thanks, I looked for a good source on this some time ago. I wonder if this ([wɒn] becoming popular among younger speakers) is the same process, as "front" being pronounced [frɒnt]. I don't know how widespread this pronunciation is but I've heard it a couple of times.