Talk:Tucson, Arizona
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tucson, Arizona article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 6 months  |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
contradictory references for origin of Tucson's name
editCuk Ṣon version:
Tohono O'odham member Gabriella Cázares-Kelly 2020:
Tucson is Cuk Ṣon.
Barbara Poole, Sara Brown 2018
The Spanish name of the city, Tucsón (tuk-son’), is from the Tohono O’odham Cuk Son, meaning “at the base of the black hill,” a reference to the basalt-covered Sentinel Peak, familiarly known “A” Mountain.
Ts-iuk-shan version:
Granger, Byrd H. 1983. Arizona's Names: X Marks the Place. Falconer Pub. Co. Page 630.
https://www.library.pima.gov/content/origin-of-the-name-tucson/
"The name of the city of Tucson derives from that given to Sentinel Mountain by [Tohono O'odham] Indians, Ts-iuk-shan, referring to the fact that the base of the mountain is darker than its summit. Hodge also says the Tu-uk-so-on means "black base.”...
Stjukson version:
https://www.kgun9.com/news/local-news/legend-or-lie-a-mountain-crater
The Tohono O'odham people founded a settlement at the base of "A" Mountain called Stjukson or black base. The black base comes from the volcanic rock. The name Stjukson eventually morphed into Tucson.
Stjucson version:
https://southernarizonaguide.com/how-tucson-got-its-name/
The Tohono O’odham (Desert People) had a village and irrigated fields at Bac, about 7 miles upstream from their village of Stjucson (or Schook-shon), meaning “At The Foot of Black Hill or Mountain.
- Please explain what you mean by contradictory. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 02:29, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
The interactive map should be made smaller
editIn my opinion, the interactive map contained within the article should be made smaller as it's affecting the alignment of the text at its current size. This makes the article look sloppy and unprofessional in my opinion. Xboxsponge15 (talk) 10:05, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Pronunciation (and more) in the first line needs repair
edit• Is the second phonemic transcription /tuːˈsɒn/ meant to represent English? If so, there seem to be problems: Does any anglophone Tucsonan ever stress the second syllable in English? And if so, a) would the "u" be long in the unstressed syllable, rather than the vowel of the stressed syllable, as in e.g. anon?. And b) is there really any possibility of the length of either being phonemic? Both transcriptions -- /ˈtuːsɒn, tuːˈsɒn/ -- seem to be phonetic with regard to vowel length (and mistaken in the case of /tuːˈsɒn/), yet phonemic, as / / claims, with regard to completely unaspirated /t/.
• It's not at all clear what "Spanish: Tucson" is intended to represent. If it's orthography, as the O'odham seems to suggest, one frequent variant is not written according to Spanish norms, which would be Tucsón; if it's intended to represent pronunciation, even Tucson fails to clarify what orthographic -cs- might represent. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 21:42, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've removed |t|uː|ˈ|s|ɒ|n. Haven't been able to find a source corroborating stress on the second syllable. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 01:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- No discussion, so removed vowel length. The transcription is phonemic, but vowel length is purely phonetic, typical but optional, especially in unguarded fast speech Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 14:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
{{IPAc-en}}is diaphonemic. Please read there and at Help:IPA/English to see how the symbols are used. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 16:41, 25 October 2024 (UTC)- "Phonemic vowel length, which exists in some dialects and involves pairs such as /ɛ/ vs. /ɛər/ and /ə/ vs. /ɜːr/ is also not marked explicitly" would appear to block falsely reporting non-phonemic vowel length as phonemic vowel length for General American stressed vowels even more robustly. /tʰ/ is quite rightly not claimed for the initial consonant of Tucson, although [tʰ] is the norm in most Englishes and all but irrepressible for North American (and many other) native speakers. Phonemic representation of Tucson can claim neither aspiration of /t/ nor length for /u/. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 17:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- I fail to get the point of all of this. the first two diaphonemes of Tucson are represented in our system as /t/ and /uː/. It’s very simple. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 17:26, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- Couldn't help but smile (sorry; honestly not trying to be rude). Yes, might seem simple at first glance, but -- circularity aside (the system presented declares that /u:/ exists, but /u/ does not, ergo thus it is) -- I would think most readers who've made it through Phonology 101 might categorize the mix of phonemes and phones surrounded by phonemic slashes as something other than simple. But I'll stop bickering, at least for now. The percentage of readers who recognize that the long /u/ is not phonemic as presented can easily self-correct for the nonce. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 20:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- Whatever you’re trying to discuss, it belongs at Help talk:IPA/English, not here. Readers don’t have to correct anything about their perception, they have to understand how the transcription system works, just like you. Because again, the system uses the symbol /uː/ for a diaphoneme that has various realizations (which include [u]) depending on the English dialect, and, again, the symbol /u/ for something that merges with different phonemes depending on the dialects. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 20:21, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I've discovered that the system adopted uses phonemic representation /u:/ for the phoneme /u/, which can have various realizations, etc. etc. Some readers steeped in phonology may grasp that rather quickly and dismiss the claim /u:/ as merely peculiar to the system chosen, others may try to improve Wikipedia by correcting it to standard phonology -- a move that would be a favor especially to non-native speakers whose first language does have phonemic vowel length. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- It’s a symbol used by countless dictionaries and as such has been adopted here. It doesn’t have to describe all the possible realizations accurately. So the readers “steeped in phonology” are invited to discuss this at the appropriate location instead of disregarding the established conventions and using the symbols as it pleases them. Regards. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 23:28, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- Dictionary transcriptions? OMG. Okay, here are the first four encountered online that contain Tucson, two American and two Brit:
- / ˈtu sɒn, tuˈsɒn /
- ˈtü-ˌsän (accompanied by stunningly inaccurate ˈtü-ˌsä-nɘn for Tucsonan)
- ˈtuˌsɑn
- /ˈtuˌsɑːn/
- The usual méfiez-vous of dictionary transcriptions aside... Fully agree that readers "have to understand how the transcription system works". The wisdom of selecting a system requiring that readers be prepared to adjust for transcriptions presented in what those with even the most basic linguistics training recognize as customary phonemic slashes being instead diaphonemic (with all that that entails) can perhaps be gauged with that in mind. I've just checked the index of terms in three intro to Phonology texts, Goldsmith's massive The Handbook of Phonological Theory, two intro to Linguistics texts, three introductions to Sociolinguistics and two wide-ranging tomes of the dialect-variation-and-change ilk. Diaphoneme is absent. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 17:56, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
- Kindly open a discussion at the appropriate place, as I already suggested, if you want to argument your opposition to the established conventions. Thank you. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 18:14, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
- No, thanks. If nothing else, the interchange here, the references on the Help:IPA/Conventions for English page, and 27 archives of Help talk:IPA/English suggest that at this point fruitful discussion of establishing standard conventions for transcriptions is extremely unlikely. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 19:42, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
- You didn’t get it. The conventions are already well established. You either discuss to change them or you follow regular usage. These are the two options. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 19:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
- "The conventions are already well established." They're established for English Wikipedia. And I get it that attempting to institute replacement with regular usage, i.e. standard conventions far more widely and immediately understood, thus far more reader friendly, would be a fruitless endeavor. Even the most cursory perusal of a bit of archived talk confirms that conclusion. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 21:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, in case you haven’t noticed this is the English Wikipedia. Welcome! We have our own conventions here, please follow them or refrain from editing. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 22:31, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
- "The conventions are already well established." They're established for English Wikipedia. And I get it that attempting to institute replacement with regular usage, i.e. standard conventions far more widely and immediately understood, thus far more reader friendly, would be a fruitless endeavor. Even the most cursory perusal of a bit of archived talk confirms that conclusion. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 21:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
- You didn’t get it. The conventions are already well established. You either discuss to change them or you follow regular usage. These are the two options. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 19:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
- No, thanks. If nothing else, the interchange here, the references on the Help:IPA/Conventions for English page, and 27 archives of Help talk:IPA/English suggest that at this point fruitful discussion of establishing standard conventions for transcriptions is extremely unlikely. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 19:42, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
- Kindly open a discussion at the appropriate place, as I already suggested, if you want to argument your opposition to the established conventions. Thank you. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 18:14, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
- It’s a symbol used by countless dictionaries and as such has been adopted here. It doesn’t have to describe all the possible realizations accurately. So the readers “steeped in phonology” are invited to discuss this at the appropriate location instead of disregarding the established conventions and using the symbols as it pleases them. Regards. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 23:28, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I've discovered that the system adopted uses phonemic representation /u:/ for the phoneme /u/, which can have various realizations, etc. etc. Some readers steeped in phonology may grasp that rather quickly and dismiss the claim /u:/ as merely peculiar to the system chosen, others may try to improve Wikipedia by correcting it to standard phonology -- a move that would be a favor especially to non-native speakers whose first language does have phonemic vowel length. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- Whatever you’re trying to discuss, it belongs at Help talk:IPA/English, not here. Readers don’t have to correct anything about their perception, they have to understand how the transcription system works, just like you. Because again, the system uses the symbol /uː/ for a diaphoneme that has various realizations (which include [u]) depending on the English dialect, and, again, the symbol /u/ for something that merges with different phonemes depending on the dialects. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 20:21, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- Couldn't help but smile (sorry; honestly not trying to be rude). Yes, might seem simple at first glance, but -- circularity aside (the system presented declares that /u:/ exists, but /u/ does not, ergo thus it is) -- I would think most readers who've made it through Phonology 101 might categorize the mix of phonemes and phones surrounded by phonemic slashes as something other than simple. But I'll stop bickering, at least for now. The percentage of readers who recognize that the long /u/ is not phonemic as presented can easily self-correct for the nonce. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 20:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- I fail to get the point of all of this. the first two diaphonemes of Tucson are represented in our system as /t/ and /uː/. It’s very simple. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 17:26, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- "Phonemic vowel length, which exists in some dialects and involves pairs such as /ɛ/ vs. /ɛər/ and /ə/ vs. /ɜːr/ is also not marked explicitly" would appear to block falsely reporting non-phonemic vowel length as phonemic vowel length for General American stressed vowels even more robustly. /tʰ/ is quite rightly not claimed for the initial consonant of Tucson, although [tʰ] is the norm in most Englishes and all but irrepressible for North American (and many other) native speakers. Phonemic representation of Tucson can claim neither aspiration of /t/ nor length for /u/. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 17:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- No discussion, so removed vowel length. The transcription is phonemic, but vowel length is purely phonetic, typical but optional, especially in unguarded fast speech Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 14:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
Addition to annual cultural events and fairs
editCyclovia Tucson
Hello everyone, I'm new to editing here, but I'd like to include Cyclovia Tucson in the annual cultural events and fairs section. It's been happening in Tucson for 11 years and it's a lot of fun for the whole community.
Cyclovia Tucson is an annual event supported by Living Streets Alliance that invites people of all ages and abilities to walk, bike, and roll down car-free streets for a day. Cyclovia is an Open Streets initiative designed to maximize the enormous amount of space roads take up in sprawling cities like Tucson. Since 2012, Cyclovia transforms the streets of metro Tucson into a block party atmosphere to socialize, incorporating partnerships with small businesses, and giving people the opportunity to move freely through the streets without moving cars. Cyclovia happens twice a year, typically in the spring and in the fall. Dbinder3 (talk) 21:38, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Two sons
editMention that due to sounding like "two sons" in English, one can find, e.g., in Google:
- Two sons barber shop in Tucson, AZ
- THE TWO SONS Band in Tucson, AZ
- https://unclejonsongs.com/two-sons-in-tucson.html
Jidanni (talk) 03:00, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- Those are enabled by spelling identity, not phonology. The -son of Tucson in American English rhymes with the vowel of Ron, Don, con-man, prefix non-, etc. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 15:52, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Ward links broken
editIt appears the ward links have expired in some manner. 2600:1011:B044:85CA:1DF1:B5A9:350E:C7E5 (talk) 20:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC)