>Unique among Indo-European languages, except for English and Bengali, it lacks all grammatical gender!
What about Afrikaans, Ossetic, Central Kurdish, Balochi, Assamese, and probably most of Insular Indo-Aryan? Tok Pisin and Bislama don't even distinguish between "he" and "she". I'd expect Scots to be similar to English but can't find anything on Wikipedia. Colloquial Welsh has gender in the singular, but if I understand correctly, gender can only affect nouns themselves (by mutation) and ten specific adjectives, but not possessives (which behave like (other) adjectives) (nor articles?).>>37706
>IPA symbols are precise in the context of a specific language
If the notation is phonological (as opposed to phonetical), yes. Phonological notation is often given between slashes, for example /tiʃ/.
But if the notation is phonetical (as opposed to phonological), it should be somewhat language-independent. Phonetical notation is given between square brackets, for example [tʰɪʃʷ].
In most cases and as far as I can tell, I've found phonetical notation on English Wiktionary and English Wikipedia to be so precise as to not require any knowledge about the phonology of the language or dialect on the part of the reader. The editors diligently add the proper marks to distinguish between, for example, various voiceless bilabial stops, such as the aspirated [pʰ] in English pot
, the unaspirated [p] in English spot
and Russian пыль
, the palatalized [pʲ] in Russian пять
, and the [p̚] (no audible release) at the end of Cantonese, Taiwanese, Hakka, Sino-Vietnamese, and Sino-Korean 十 "10". Or various voiceless velar stops, such as the aspirated [kʰ] in English cough
, the unaspirated [k] in English scum
and Russian кот
, the palatalized [kʲ] in Russian Кёнигсберг
, and the [k̚] (no audible release) in Saigon Vietnamese Việt Nam
and at the end of Cantonese, Taiwanese, Hakka, and Sino-Korean 六 "6". Same for all manner of other things, such as vowels, tone, voice, or different varieties of R-ish and L-ish sounds.