Shavian eGroup Archive Browser

On Friday, May 10, 2002, at 02:16 , Lee wrote:



Scott,

I have Mac OS X and couldn't figure out how to turn all the question marks from your web pages to readable Shavian. What's the secret? My Mac's running OS 9.2.2 and OS X 10.1.4, SOOO, it's got to be simple! I'm using Internet Explorer 5.1 for Mac for my browser.

Lee



First, download the Unicode TrueType font from my web page (down in the table where it says MacOS X and font). Place this into your ~/Library/Fonts directory. This should now enable any Cocoa application to use this font properly. For example, you should be able to open any of the files in the columns marked Shavian with the TextEdit application since they are just Unicode versions of the texts.

To open the web pages, I would advise using the Omniweb browser from www.omnigroup.com because it is a Cocoa application and opening any of the UTF-8 pages just works assuming you have the font installed on your system.

Unfortunately Microsoft does not know how to handle fonts very well, and therefore Explorer users suffer. I am not an Explorer user, but in the Windows world I had to set the fonts for Unicode pages to be the Shaw font (which is the one that you stick in your Fonts folder).

--Scott

On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 11:51:37PM -0700, Brion L. VIBBER wrote:
> On ĵaŭ, 2002-05-09 at 22:10, Bob Schmertz wrote:
> > On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 01:01:29AM -0700, Brion L. VIBBER wrote:
> > > On sab, 2002-05-04 at 16:57, rschmertz wrote:
> > > > Any Linux/Unix users out there who use Shavian fonts in X Windows?
> > >
> > > They work just as well as other TrueType fonts, with caveats: none of
> > > the Shavian fonts I know of are hinted, and they all look dreadful
> > > without smoothing/antialiasing unless you blow up the font size to epic
> > > proportions. Font smoothing is something that's still coming into the
> > > Linux world bit by bit; the text editor yudit and recent versions of
> > > Mozilla can do their own TrueType smooth font rendering; some versions
> [..]
> > Never heard of yudit.
>
> http://yudit.org/

Damn, this is hot $#|7!!! No time to compile/play with it tonight, will
have to try tomorrow. This looks like a multilinguist's dream come true!

--
Cheers,
Bob Schmertz


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=194081.2053425.3521449.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1046314/R=1/*http://www.ediets.com/start.cfm?code=3225>
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=194081.2053425.3521449.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1046314/R=2/*http://www.ediets.com/start.cfm?code=3225> Height: 4 5 6 7 ft 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 in
Weight:
Sex: F M

<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=194081.2053425.3521449.1829184/D=egroupmail/S=1705213030:HM/A=1046314/rand=298019558>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

Bob Schmertz wrote:
> On Wed, May 08, 2002 at 06:19:08AM +0200, Philip Newton wrote:
> >
> > (Or use "sin king, sinking, seen king".) I also think I have three
> > different vowels in this triplet.
>
> You may pronounce these differently, but your sound in
> "sinking" is merely an allophone of the sound in "sin"

You're undoubtedly right that the difference is not phonemic. However, since
for me, the phone is roughly in-between [i:] and [I], it makes it a bit
difficult to choose which phoneme to use to represent it. I presume it is,
as you said, an allophone of /I/ rather than of /i/. (A similar ambiguity
exists for word-final [i] as in "city" or "lovely", which some spell as /i/
and others as /I/.)

Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@...>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=225940.2049433.3518213.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1061772/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.fullaccessmedical.com/t/7428/211/2458684356>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=225940.2049433.3518213.1829184/D=egroupmail/S=1705213030:HM/A=1061772/rand=295817000>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

I was looking over the charts for Shaven and Quicksript and I can't
seem to figure out hot to write the "u" sound in the work "up".

Help



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=225940.2049433.3518213.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1061772/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.fullaccessmedical.com/t/7428/211/2458684356>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=225940.2049433.3518213.1829184/D=egroupmail/S=1705213030:HM/A=1061772/rand=233691821>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

You didn't mention what your references you were using. All references I have seen show this, but here's one for Shavian:
http://www.simonbarne.com/shavian/chart.html .

"Up" is actually the name of the glyph you are looking for. (All the glyphs have names: "tot" for the one that represents the "t" sound, "ado" for the one that represents the shwa -- and "up" for the one that represents the "short u"). It is row 32 on the chart I linked to, and looks rather like a 7 -- or like an "ado" with a horizontal line at the top.

Cheers,
Bob Schmertz


On 13 May 2002, chuck091956 wrote:

> I was looking over the charts for Shaven and
> Quicksript and I can't seem to figure out hot
> to write the "u" sound in the work "up".
>
> Help
>


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=178320.2057063.3524709.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=979989/R=0/*http://www.fastweb.com/ib/yahoo-79f>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=178320.2057063.3524709.1829184/D=egroupmail/S=1705213030:HM/A=979989/rand=622483659>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 10:10:11AM +0200, Newton, Philip wrote:
> Bob Schmertz wrote:
> > On Wed, May 08, 2002 at 06:19:08AM +0200, Philip Newton wrote:
> > >
> > > (Or use "sin king, sinking, seen king".) I also think I have three
> > > different vowels in this triplet.
> >
> > You may pronounce these differently, but your sound in
> > "sinking" is merely an allophone of the sound in "sin"
>
> You're undoubtedly right that the difference is not phonemic. However, since
> for me, the phone is roughly in-between [i:] and [I], it makes it a bit
> difficult to choose which phoneme to use to represent it. I presume it is,
> as you said, an allophone of /I/ rather than of /i/. (A similar ambiguity
> exists for word-final [i] as in "city" or "lovely", which some spell as /i/
> and others as /I/.)
>

If it helps, remember there is no English word that has a long vowel
before the "ng" phoneme -- unless, of course, you happen to feel that the
"i" in "sing" is a "long e" (or "eat", in Shavian terminology). And, of
course, it is spelled with the letter "i", which is almost never used by
itself to indicate the "eat" phoneme in words of English/Germanic origin.

The same thing applies, in my opinion, for final vowels -- always long
vowels. I definitely pronounce "city" with an "eat" sound, but I am
American, and I gather the British pronounce it more like an "if". So
that seems to be an inconsistency, but I would argue that, again, the
British pronunciation is an allophone. I'm not sure I can make as strong
a case for that, though.

--
Cheers,
Bob Schmertz


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=194081.2053425.3521449.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1036975/R=0/*http://www.ediets.com/start.cfm?code=3225>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=194081.2053425.3521449.1829184/D=egroupmail/S=1705213030:HM/A=1036975/rand=112566050>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

On mon, 2002-05-13 at 19:35, Bob Schmertz wrote:
> If it helps, remember there is no English word that has a long vowel
> before the "ng" phoneme -- unless, of course, you happen to feel that the
> "i" in "sing" is a "long e" (or "eat", in Shavian terminology).

In a similar vein, how about, say, "sang" (and bang, hang, gang, Tang(R), thanks, language, etc)? I perceive it as having "long a"(1) and whould thus spell it as?sEN (so-age-hung); but the dictionaries I've checked(2) give the vowel as "short a", which would suggest spelling it?sAN (so-ash-hung).

I haven't happened to come across a canonical spelling yet (I don't have an Androcles), but I would lean towards "ash" based on the -ing usage, despite the seemingly wrong (to my ears) vowel.

(1) On gross repetition and streching out the vowel, I'm quite sure it's a bit higher in the mouth than that in "age", but I can't make it sound like an "ash" without sounding completely wrong.

(2) The American Heritage Dictionary which has some sort of generic American pronunciation in an idiosyncratic orthography, and the English side of the Robert-Collins English-French dictionary, which gives British RP pronunciations in IPA.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=226014.2032696.3508022.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1000239/R=0/*http://ads.x10.com/?bHlhaG9vaG0xLmRhd=1021359241%3eM=226014.2032696.3508022.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1000239/R=1>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=226014.2032696.3508022.1829184/D=egroupmail/S=1705213030:HM/A=1000239/rand=273015452>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

Why we need Shavian Symbols.



This spelling controversy still gives-our scholars Hell.



I'm sure that you already know, Of tough, cough, bough and dough?



Of through, and who and what a bother.



Try to find a word that rhymes with mother



What about beat and great and threat?



They rhyme with sweet, straight and debt.



As for rose and dose, you 'll always lose



No matter .what you pick and choose,



And cord is not like word,



Mould is not like could, ~ Neither wood like would.



Cow and now, but low and slow, What a way to come and go.



We have gone, we have done and we are prone,



Is there any reason that is known?



In Brief it always seems to me,



That sounds and spelling won't agree!



You see,

We

Need more

Shaw.






Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=194081.2053425.3521449.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1036975/R=0/*http://www.ediets.com/start.cfm?code=3225>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=194081.2053425.3521449.1829184/D=egroupmail/S=1705213030:HM/A=1036975/rand=697171324>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

--- In shavian@y..., "Brion L. VIBBER" <brion@p...> wrote:
> In a similar vein, how about, say, "sang" (and bang, hang, gang,
> Tang(R), thanks, language, etc)? I perceive it as having "long
a"(1) and
> whould thus spell it as sEN (so-age-hung); but the dictionaries
I've
> checked(2) give the vowel as "short a", which would suggest
spelling
> it sAN (so-ash-hung).
>
> I haven't happened to come across a canonical spelling yet (I don't
have
> an Androcles), but I would lean towards "ash" based on the -ing
usage,
> despite the seemingly wrong (to my ears) vowel.
>
> (1) On gross repetition and streching out the vowel, I'm quite sure
it's
> a bit higher in the mouth than that in "age", but I can't make it
sound
> like an "ash" without sounding completely wrong.

That's the same basic system I used to (finally) resolve the "ing
dilemma" for me. Instead of using words such as "thinking", I instead
looked at words such as "being", "skiing", etc. Since the voels in
each word sound different from each other (to me), and since the
first vowel is obviously a long e in each case, I've decided to
compromise by using the short i for ing, despite how wrong it looks
(IMHO). L8r.



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=178320.2057063.3524709.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=979990/R=0/*http://www.fastweb.com/ib/yahoo-79f>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=178320.2057063.3524709.1829184/D=egroupmail/S=1705213030:HM/A=979990/rand=410040762>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

--- In shavian@y..., "Hugh Birkenhead" <h.birkenhead@u...> wrote:
> This kind of thing has been mentioned before, I think. Shavian is
designed to represent the most common sounds necessary to communicate
English effectively. Combining two consonants together does not
really fit into this I don't think, especially as 'x' isn't that
common.

I forgot to respond to this before. While it's true what the
letter "x" isn't all that common, the sound itself can be represented
in many different ways, eg. cs (eg. politics, from poly --> many,
tics --> blood sucking parasites ;-)), cks (eg. bricks), gs (eg.
eggs), etc. According to the Unifon page, the k sound can be
respresented 17 diferent ways (11 common), s can also be represented
17 ways (9 common), g 6 ways (4 common) and z 13 ways (9 common),
which gives a theoretical maximum of 367 ways (117 common) to
represent the x sounds. True, not every combination will be seen in
English words, but I'm sure there would be a sizable number of them,
pushing it up high enough to justify a separate character. L8r.



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=194081.2053425.3521449.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1046314/R=1/*http://www.ediets.com/start.cfm?code=3225>
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=194081.2053425.3521449.1829184/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1046314/R=2/*http://www.ediets.com/start.cfm?code=3225> Height: 4 5 6 7 ft 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 in
Weight:
Sex: F M

<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=194081.2053425.3521449.1829184/D=egroupmail/S=1705213030:HM/A=1046314/rand=590137314>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .