/ɡ/ vs /ɣ/ in Frisian

I don't see the point of writing /ɣ/, because it's considered an allophone of /ɡ/ and isn't the usual realization. Is there any reason to be inconsistent with other entries in respect to the transcription of g? Ppcosta (talk) 14:03, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

You have it backwards. [ɡ] is an allophone of /ɣ/ that appears only at the beginning of a stressed syllable. Elsewhere, [ɣ] appears.

You're right, sorry, I was confused by the way some IPA transcriptions were written.

By the way, âlden is an attested plural of âlder.

But WFT gives only âlders. Which is correct?

Ok, it does have âlden: http://gtb.inl.nl/iWDB/search?actie=article&wdb=WFT&id=727&lemma=%C3%A2lden&domein=0&conc=true . However, it considers it a lemma in its own right and not a plural of âlder. It appears that âlden has additional meanings, such as "elderly people" and "ancestors". If Dutch grammar is any indication, it is a substantivised form of "old" and thus means "old ones", while âlder is originally a comparative "older".

Even more conflictingly (and interestingly), the West Frisian Wikipedia also includes âldelju, so there seems to be a kind of three-way split between the -s suffix (which would usually be used with a word that ends in -er), the -en suffix, and the -lju suffix (also used with man and frou). I guess it's up to you on how you want to treat these forms.

I get messages from you all that I am not necessarily interested in seeing- are these messages pushed to all Wiktionary editors or what? Please help

I have no idea. Ask on WT:GP maybe?

Unwatch the talk page?