Talk:Berlin

The IPA transcription of the german name is incorrect. It is shown as [bɛʁˈliːn] while correctly it would be [bɛɐ̯ˈliːn]. UndeadLime (talk) 10:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Fixed it. UndeadLime (talk) 13:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately this is a transcription that is still often used, such as by the German Wiktionary, who refer back to DUDEN. It is very silly. Anselm Schüler (talk) 18:26, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

⟨ʁ⟩ is ambiguous as to whether it's fricative or approximant, so ⟨ʁ⟩ already encompasses [ɐ̯], much the same way as ⟨j⟩ and ⟨i̯⟩, and ⟨ɹ⟩ and ⟨ɚ̯⟩, are synonymous. Nardog (talk) 13:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

The approimant form of ⟨ʁ⟩ is /ʁ̞/ and even if it was /ʁ̞/ I'm still not sure wether thats correct. UndeadLime (talk) 14:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

That's not how narrowness works. Read the IPA Handbook. Besides, it makes no sense to change it here but not in the hundreds of other such transcriptions, including Albert Einstein, Luxembourg, Angela Merkel, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Habsburg monarchy, Mercedes-Benz, Strasbourg, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, and North Rhine-Westphalia. Nardog (talk) 15:41, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

It's also used like that because it shows the potential difference between [aʁ] and [aːɐ̯] which some (not all) speakers make. Using ⟨aɐ̯⟩ for the one with the underlying short vowel is just wrong, it's not a diphthong. In Standard German, those are often homophonous as [aː ~ ɑː] (which may or may not yield a merger with /aː/), yet in Low German-influenced German they're [æː] and [ɑː], two very distinct monophthongs (I think the latter is fully merged with /aː/, which is open back). For others, they're [aʁ] and [aː ~ ɑː], or fluctuating between that and [aː ~ ɑː] for both. It's really complicated and not at all straightforward as in Danish or English. If the /r/ is there, it's there as an approximant, or regionally as a fricative which can be devoiced before fortes (as in Luxembourgish).

I agree that the most common pronunciation is [bɛɐ̯ˈliːn], that's the only one I've ever heard in contemporary German (discounting obvious regional accents, you can hear [bɛɾˈliːn] in Switzerland and [bæʁˈliːn] in Luxembourg). I must admit that I can't hear the r-reflex very well sometimes, to me it at least sometimes sounds like [bɛˈliːn] (which is not a transcription I'd use in an encyclopedia, of course). Sol505000 (talk) 11:29, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

The number of rainy days in Berlin is not correct. Its 100-110 days. 2A02:8109:9F0B:1500:40E8:FDE6:E50C:2A59 (talk) 20:19, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

What source is this based on? I had a look at the dataset and the number is correct, but it's based on a fairly low threshhold (0.1mm). There are 137 days with > 0.3mm and 64 with > 2.5mm. The German wikipedia gives a lower number, but with no indication of the threshhold used. Best, Cfrhansen (talk) 23:04, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Ok understood. Still rather strange metric. I've never seen anywhere else that the definition for a rainy day is as low as > 0.1 mm. 2A02:8109:9F18:3500:6020:4AC6:FB00:509D (talk) 06:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

In good faith, Celco85 exchanged a picture for another one that was "enhanced". However, when I compare the two pictures, I can see that yes, the second ("enhanced") picture is less skewed than the first one, but the quality of the first picture is so much better! Here are both pictures:

The resolution of the original image is higher than that of the edited image. So I will put the original image back in. Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 07:15, 8 March 2025 (UTC)