griuskant (conversation without conscript)
aesk thusti shoita. aesk kon ipai cithi spaezha griuskant [c] un [j] ik /tʃ/ and /dʒ/ vazh degkous. raeses kon az /t͡ɕ/ un /d͡ʑ/.
/'esk 'θusti 'ʃɔita. 'esk 'kɔn 'ipai 'ciθi 'speʒa 'griuskant 'tʃi un 'dʒi ik 'ʒe un 'ʒe vaʒ 'dəgkɔus. 'resəs kɔn az 'ʒe un 'ʒe/
1SG new-A realise-V. 1SG might IPA-A wrong-A think-V griuskant [c] and [j] as /tʃ/ and /dʒ/ attribution back.times. 3PL might is /t͡ɕ/ and /d͡ʑ/
I just realised something. I may have wrongly notated [c] and [j] in griuskant with IPA as /tʃ/ and /dʒ/ all these while. They could be /t͡ɕ/ and /d͡ʑ/.
uvos shir zidan zhaed raeses staipgloda skaervaegi zhur inglendjeth ut aesk kyda zhaed zhae ovvazhonstaipaens uvzaei arand ik /tʃ/ un /dʒ/. oezfega?
/'uvɔs 'ʃir 'zidan ʒed 'resəs 'staipglɔda 'skervegi ʒur 'iŋglənddʒəθ ut 'esk 'kYda ʒed 'ʒe 'ɔvvaʒɔnstaipens 'uvzei 'arand ik 'ʒe un 'ʒe. 'ɯzfəga/
always know got-V-PASS COMP 3PL sound.seem-V different-A than England.language but 1SG thought-V COMP that inter.same-NN.sound.component also do-V-T3 as /tʃ/ and /dʒ/. intra.check-V
Like, I have always known that they sound different from English, but I've always thought all those allophones(?) were also notated as /tʃ/ and /dʒ/. Can anyone confirm?