Andreas Johansson wrote:

> Quoting Estel Telcontar <[log in to unmask]>:
> > Perhaps it has to do with syllable boundaries? I'm guessing that in
> > _ignorera_ there is a syllable break between the "g" ([g] or [N]) and
> > the "n", while _ugn_ is all one syllable.
> Nice theory, which unfortunately founders on _ugnar_ ['8Nnar] "owens".

Well, not really as _ugnar_ is _ugn_ + _ar_ [8Nn]+[ar], while there is no
natural way to make _ignorera_ as _ign_+_o..._

You may syllabize _ugnar_ as _ug-nar_ [8N.nar], but the [Nn] are still part
of one morphem.

OTOH, is there a propper way for Swedish writting to force a [g.n]
pronunciation?  We can well say that the correct pronunciation of _ignorera_
(_ig-no-re-ra_) is [] and that the [INnUre:ra] pronunciation is
orthographical pronunciation.

-- Carlos Th