FAMILY NAME PRONUNCIATION AND RECORDING WORKSHEET Original communication worksheet — not a dictionary or professional review. VERSION A Name as written, with all parts/script: ____________________ Language / family or regional context: ____________________ Everyday spoken form: ____________________ Separate short form, if used: ____________________ Plain cue and its convention: ____________________ Optional checked IPA / source and variety: ____________________ Sound or stress note checked with speaker: ____________________ Matching recording label: ____________________ Revision checked: ____________________ Audience and form they should use: ____________________ VERSION B Name as written, with all parts/script: ____________________ Language / family or regional context: ____________________ Everyday spoken form: ____________________ Separate short form, if used: ____________________ Plain cue and its convention: ____________________ Optional checked IPA / source and variety: ____________________ Sound or stress note checked with speaker: ____________________ Matching recording label: ____________________ Revision checked: ____________________ Audience and form they should use: ____________________ PLAIN CUE EXAMPLE part-ONE-part uses CAPITALS for main stress. Artificial example only, not an actual name or IPA transcription. Explain the convention; an English respelling may leave sound details unclear. RECORDING SEQUENCE Say the intended name at ordinary pace; optionally explain components more slowly; say a short natural sentence; listen back; label the recording to match the card; ask a listener what they heard. Keep full name and short form distinct. No child’s voice or upload to this site is required. SIX CARD FIELDS Name as written | Keep the complete spelling, script, spaces and punctuation. | Do not replace this field with a sound cue. Version and language | Label the language and, when relevant, the regional or family usage. | Give different intended versions separate cards. Everyday spoken form | Record the actual form used to address the child. | Keep any nickname separate from the full name. Plain sound cue | Write a listener-friendly approximation and explain its convention. | An English cue can leave vowels or consonants unclear. Stress or other sound notes | Mark the main stress if that description fits the language. | Use appropriate speaker help for tone or other distinctions. Recording and revision | Note the matching local recording and when you last checked it. | Do not point a new card to an old pronunciation version. LISTENER CHECKS Two people hear a cue differently | The cue’s vowel examples and the listener’s accent. | Add a matching recording or a more precise speaker-approved note. The written cue has one strong syllable | Whether CAPITALS were intended to mark main stress. | Explain the convention instead of asking the reader to guess. A dictionary gives another pronunciation | The dictionary’s language, variety and actual entry. | Label the reference and the family version separately. Two languages use different versions | The context and the name order in each version. | Keep two labeled cards and matching recordings. A form has too few name boxes | What the receiving organisation actually requires. | Ask how to retain the full name; do not delete a part automatically. A listener repeats an older version | The cue, recording and revision label they received. | Send the current intended version and retire a misleading old card. SIX INVENTED PRACTICE CASES Case 1 Two grandparents read the same written sound cue with different vowels. Has one of them necessarily ignored the instructions? No. Check what the cue actually communicates to each listener. A cue built from ordinary English spelling is an approximation. Its example vowels can be heard differently across accents, and the listener may not know which syllable the capitals are meant to emphasize. Ask each person what they heard, without first calling the response wrong. Then demonstrate the intended version, add a matching recording if useful, and revise the ambiguous cue. The goal is a repeatable family instruction, not winning an argument about a spelling convention. Case 2 A family wants to use one pronunciation in one language and another in a second language. Should the card combine pieces of both into a single compromise? Keep the intended versions distinct and label when each is used. A merged cue can leave the listener with a pronunciation nobody intended. Write separate version labels, complete written names and sound notes, and keep a matching recording for each. If the name order changes in an introduction, show that order clearly as well. Ask the relevant speakers to check each version on its own. The presence of two versions is not proof that one must be corrected or that the name has two different origins; those are separate questions requiring their own evidence. Case 3 An English dictionary pronunciation differs from the family’s chosen spoken form. Does the dictionary entry settle how this particular child must be addressed? Use the entry as a labeled reference and communicate the intended personal pronunciation. First check that the source covers the exact spelling and language you are asking about. A dictionary describes its selected pronunciation or variants; it does not record every individual family’s intended use. Keep the family’s demonstrated version on the communication card. If the family wants to understand a traditional language form, ask a knowledgeable speaker or consult an appropriate source separately. Neither a sound cue nor a personal recording proves an etymology, regional prevalence or official registration rule. Case 4 The recording says only a familiar short form, while the printed card shows a longer full name. Is that enough for someone who needs to introduce the full name? Record the full form too, and explain the role of the short form. A listener cannot reliably reconstruct an unrecorded name from a nickname. Keep the complete written form, the everyday spoken form and any short form as distinct entries. Record the complete name in its intended order, then the short form if it is useful for that audience. Say which one should be used in the particular introduction. The name does not need an invented expansion, and an organisation’s form layout is not a reason to silently remove a family-name component. Case 5 A very slow recording sounds clear, but a listener loses the name when it is spoken in a normal sentence. Should every future introduction use the exaggerated slow version? Add an ordinary-speed demonstration and a short natural sentence. A careful component-by-component take can help someone locate a sound, but it may alter rhythm or hide the transitions in ordinary speech. Keep a normal spoken version as the main model. Use a slower take only as a supporting explanation, then return to the whole name in a simple introduction. Listen back to check that the microphone captured the beginning and ending, and invite a listener to repeat what they heard. That small check does not predict every future listener’s reaction. Case 6 The family revises its pronunciation note after a speaker points out an ambiguity. The old recording is still attached to the card. Is changing only the printed cue sufficient? Update the cue, recording and version label together. Conflicting instructions force the listener to choose between the written and spoken models. Check that the complete spelling, language label, everyday form, sound cue and recording describe the same intended version. Retain an earlier record separately only if the family needs it, and make clear that it is no longer the current instruction. Share the revised version with the people who use it. A date is a revision aid, not a claim that the card has undergone professional linguistic review. SOURCES AND SCOPE https://dictionary.cambridge.org/help/phonetics.html IPA/stress/division and UK/US conventions; complete visible article read, audio not played. https://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-personal-names Selected name-structure, written-form ambiguity and field-design sections; no specific personal-name pronunciation or registration rule inferred. Keep only details the intended listener needs. Revise text and audio together.