Latin syllabifier gives wrong results for clusters of three consonants
See original GitHub issueThe Latin syllabifier (in version 0.1.121) sometimes gives incorrect results for words with long consonant clusters. It doesn’t seem to detect correctly which clusters are allowed in onsets and which aren’t:
>>> s.syllabify('pulchra')
['pulch', 'ra']
>>> s.syllabify('sumptus')
['sum', 'ptus']
The correct syllabifications, as far as I can tell, would be pul-chra and sump-tus (since stop+liquid is a valid onset and stop+stop is not).
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 3 years ago
- Comments:5 (4 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
English Consonant Clusters Practice - Record & Listen
Practice consonant clusters. Consonant blend examples with audio, video exercises for ESL speakers to pronounce English clusters clearly. Improve today.
Read more >Data-Driven Syllabification for Middle Dutch - Digital Medievalist
The order of consonants in both clusters is determined by the Sonority Ranking Hierarchy (Figure 2). The sonority of consonants has to decrease ......
Read more >On the Syllabification of Phonemes. - ResearchGate
According to this principle a syllable will begin or end with a consonant cluster that is found at the beginning or end of...
Read more >(PDF) A Rule-Based Syllabifier for Serbian | Aniko Kovač
We focus on three important principles of phonological rule application: ... The initial member of a consonant cluster in the rule descriptions presented ......
Read more >Syllabifier - marello.org
In addition to these rules, Wheelock's Latin provides this sound exception: Also counted as single consonants are qu and the aspirates ch, ph,...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
Hopefully fixed by #994
I believe this was resolved, we’ll reopen if not. Thank you @dstelzer for your contribution!