Shavian eGroup Archive Browser

I think part of the reason that some of us are finding it
so hard to type in shavian is BECAUSE of the illogical
keyboard layout. I am trying to move away from the
"Androlocles" layout because I am moving away from the
roman alphabet. The two should not intermix. Once again,
let me say that this is about reading. We must learn to
decode and recode the letters from our minds to shavian,
not from our minds to roman to whatever to shavian, and
back.

--Star

--- rubik67 <rubik67@...> wrote:
> --- In shavian@y..., Star Raven <celestraof12worlds@y...>
> wrote:
> > Why should we be trying to fit the Shavian character
> set to
> > the roman alphabet that we are trying to rid ourselves
> of?
> > If the alphabet were done this way, that is, make the
> shift
> > key "flip" the letter or change it into its pair, then
> > typing speed would increase--I'm sure of it!
>
> One reason to do so is because people are familiar with
> it. Another
> would be that the key mappings would remain logically
> consistent is
> someone used a different keyboard layout, eg. Dvorak.
> Anyway, is the
> key map layout in Androcles really logical? Given
> everyone's
> familiarity with the Roman alphabet, it seems to be
> slapped together
> willy nilly. True, the voiced and voiceless letters are
> paired up,
> the r sounds are all on the same line, and mirrored
> vowels are placed
> together, but aside from that, the way each letter group
> is arranged
> on each line doesn't seem to follow any particular
> pattern that I
> could see. switching to other keyboard layouts would only
> add to the
> confusion. At least the way it is now, people can access,
> for
> example, the "k" sound by typing the letter "k", and
> always will
> access it by typing "k" regardless of which keyboard
> layout they're
> using. L8r.
>
>


=====
"You know what they say, 'Human see, Human do.' "
--Julius, Planet of the Apes

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1182730/R=0/*http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-1736-1039-335>

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

Hi Steve

I agree with you that even with the some nice features, Tengwar does not come close to having all the the advantages of the Shaw Alphabet as reform Alphabet.

The only interesting feature is the use dicritic marks to indicate the vowels.

This is something that I investigated once.

If you removed vowels following consonants that were part of the same syllable and replaced them with Dicritic marks, you would get a much reduced word size, without much loss in recognition of familar words. Unfamilar words would be a difficult problem. This idea works well in Hebrew mainly because syllable formation in that language, is simple and remarkable consistent.

English would require the addition of Vowel placeholders, that might be almost as complex as the vowel letters you replace.

Regards, Paul V,

_____________________________attached_______________________________





>From: Steve Bett
>Reply-To: shavian@...
>To: aesir
>CC: saundspel@...
>Subject: [shavian] Tolkein's Tengwar as a reform alphabet
>Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 14:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
>
>John,
>
>You suggested Tolkein's Tengwar from Lord of the Rings
>as an alternative to the Shaw alphabet.
>
>I had Tengwar mixed up with another one of Tolkein's
>Runic scripts.
>
>Tengwar is detailed enough to represent English.
>However, I think it was designed to be exotic rather
>than simple.
>
>Here is an example of some of the consonants.
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saundspel/files/scripts/runes-tengwar.gif
>
>The characters are certainly not models of
>distinctiveness - as with Eurunic, the letters look
>quite similar except for the details.
>
>The recognition value of the word forms are more
>opaque than Shavian.
>
>The vowels are marked with a kind of point system
>similar in some respects to Hebrew. As a code it
>works -- All of the phonemes are represented. As
>something simple to read, it does not.
>
>Regards,
>
>Steve
>
>--- aesir wrote:
>
> > > I like Tolkein's runic based notations but I don't
>think they have quite enough characters to be fully
>phonemic as a writing system for present day English
>speech.
>
> > Seriously? This is curvy, elvish alphabet, not the
> > faux-runic one. Are there
> > ANY sounds it cannot represent?
>
>REF:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saundspel/files/scripts/runes.html
>
>The Eurunic characters are inserted into a chart for
>IPA so all of the IPA for English sound signs are
>represented.
>
>Eurunic was commissioned by a video game company. It
>was supposed to be exotic - not necessarily practical.
>
>--Steve
>
>=====
>
>To join SAUNDSPEL - The Phonology Forum
>send a blank email to saundspel-subscribe@...
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
>http://www.hotjobs.com
>
>------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
>4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now
>http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/Ey.GAA/mx3olB/TM
>---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

________________________________

Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. Click Here <http://g.msn.com/1HM1ENCA/c157??PI=44318>


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1182730/R=0/*http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-1736-1039-335>

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

I'm updating my links. Does anyone know where these web sites have gone?

Phillip Driscoll's site, formerly at http://www2.c4systm.com/~phild/

Clayton Smith's site, supposedly at
http://www.irrational.net/argilo/index-sh.html, but I can't open the
page.

Lionel Ghoti's site - long gone, though archived at
http://web.archive.org/web/20011130133333/http://www.shavian.f9.co.uk

Also, if there are any new sites to add, please let me know.

Thanks!

Simon Barne
still at http://www.simonbarne.com/shavian/


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


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.5 - Release Date: 03/02/2005

Hi Simon

No, I'm afraid all those sites are gone. Shame. I haven't managed to get in touch with Lionel Ghoti for two years! None of his email addresses work. I was never really in contact with Phillip Driscoll to start with so I'm not sure of his whereabouts.

Hugh

----- Original Message -----
From: Simon Barne <mailto:sosostris@...>
To: shavian@... <mailto:shavian@...>
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 5:57 PM
Subject: [shavian] Lost sites

I'm updating my links. Does anyone know where these web sites have gone?

Phillip Driscoll's site, formerly at http://www2.c4systm.com/~phild/

Clayton Smith's site, supposedly at
http://www.irrational.net/argilo/index-sh.html, but I can't open the
page.

Lionel Ghoti's site - long gone, though archived at
http://web.archive.org/web/20011130133333/http://www.shavian.f9.co.uk

Also, if there are any new sites to add, please let me know.

Thanks!

Simon Barne
still at http://www.simonbarne.com/shavian/


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



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.5 - Release Date: 03/02/2005

wAr iz e fIlz Area?

rubik67 wrote:

I've just uploaded my new font to the files area. It's only
12K long and includes versions for Mac and Windows. Please
check it out and let me know what you think. :-) L8r.




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




internashunal english////abrEviaeshunz: t = to e = the f = of n = and ////long vowelz: ae, ee, ie, oe, ue.////digrafs: ah, az in ah / au, az in august / ch, in church / oo, ooze / ou, out / oi/oy, oil / sh, shore / th, they / zh, az in azure



________________________________

Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs, a Yahoo! service <http://rd.yahoo.com/careers/mailsig/new/*http://www.hotjobs.com> - Search Thousands of New Jobs

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1182730/R=0/*http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-1736-1039-335>

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

Star Raven wrote:

> The shift key would become a kind
> of "flip" key. Let's just assume that one put all of the
> deep letters on the top row--ignore the roman letters up
> there, this is just a different idea of mapping--then when
> the shift key is pressed, it makes a deep letter into a
> tall letter.

Star:

Hitting the shift key slows a typist down, even if only marginally. If you
had to hit the shift key for all tall letters this would become a real drag
on typing speed. This discussion has already been held on the Read_Alphabet
site where we have designed a keyboard mapping that is much more intuitive
for those who already know conventional Roman Alphabet spelling, which,
after all, is all of us.

I have read that it takes about a month to become a touch typist using the
Dvorak keyboard (rather than Qwerty) because it requires the brain to make
the connection between the letter wanted and the physical position of the
letter on the keyboard. In other words, one cannot be an effective (fast)
touch typist in two different keyboard mappings. Since most of us will be
using Qwerty into the future, as I doubt any of us believe Quikscript or
Shavian will take the world by storm in the near future, it is impractical,
IMHO, to divorce the mapping for Shavian or Quikscript completely from the
current Roman Alphabet keyboard.

Paige


> Why should we be trying to fit the Shavian character set to
> the roman alphabet that we are trying to rid ourselves of?
> If the alphabet were done this way, that is, make the shift
> key "flip" the letter or change it into its pair, then
> typing speed would increase--I'm sure of it!
>
> --Star



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=229641.2166546.3626727.2204139/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1142327/R=0/*http://promo.yahoo.com/debtscape/>

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

Star Raven wrote:

> The shift key would become a kind
> of "flip" key. Let's just assume that one put all of the
> deep letters on the top row--ignore the roman letters up
> there, this is just a different idea of mapping--then when
> the shift key is pressed, it makes a deep letter into a
> tall letter.

Star:

Hitting the shift key slows a typist down, even if only marginally. If you
had to hit the shift key for all tall letters this would become a real drag
on typing speed. This discussion has already been held on the Read_Alphabet
site where we have designed a keyboard mapping that is much more intuitive
for those who already know conventional Roman Alphabet spelling, which,
after all, is all of us.

I have read that it takes about a month to become a touch typist using the
Dvorak keyboard (rather than Qwerty) because it requires the brain to make
the connection between the letter wanted and the physical position of the
letter on the keyboard. In other words, one cannot be an effective (fast)
touch typist in two different keyboard mappings. Since most of us will be
using Qwerty into the future, as I doubt any of us believe Quikscript or
Shavian will take the world by storm in the near future, it is impractical,
IMHO, to divorce the mapping for Shavian or Quikscript completely from the
current Roman Alphabet keyboard.

Paige


> Why should we be trying to fit the Shavian character set to
> the roman alphabet that we are trying to rid ourselves of?
> If the alphabet were done this way, that is, make the shift
> key "flip" the letter or change it into its pair, then
> typing speed would increase--I'm sure of it!
>
> --Star



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=229641.2166546.3626727.2204139/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1142327/R=0/*http://promo.yahoo.com/debtscape/>

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

Hi Rubik

Sorry that the name of my website www.shawalphabet.com appears deceptive. It
does actually shows a Revised version of Shaw Alphabet,
that incorporates the Glottal Stop, and attempts to minimize the importance
of Vowel letters by substituting vowel placeholders,
for the Schwa (ado) and the other less significant vowel sounds.

I developed this Revision of the Shaw Alphabet, to further solve the problem
where the different accents of English can result in different spellings of
the same word. The majority of English accent variations seem to reside
mostly in the vowel sounds.

Interestly, the original addition of r+sound letters to the Shaw Alphabet
seem to be an attempt to isolate the differences between a Rhotic and
Non-Rhotic English pronunciation.

But in any case I call this alphabet, the Revised Shaw Alphabet as opposed
to the original Shavian. And of course, I am interested in making whatever
changes I can, to preserve the beautiful internal consistency of the
original Shaw Alphabet.

Regards, Paul Vandenbrink

P.S. I expect to make changes in the site to show exactly how the new
letters are derived from the original Shavian Alphabet. But that will take
some time.
__________________attached__________________________________________

>From: "rubik67" <rubik67@...>
>Reply-To: shavian@...
>To: shavian@...
>Subject: [shavian] Re: hung vs ha-ha
>Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 21:12:53 -0000
>
>--- In shavian@y..., "Hugh Birkenhead" <h.birkenhead@u...> wrote:
> > "Thou musteth leave
> > Androcles's Shavianeth intacteth with no changeseth of any kindeth"
> >
> > Classic! :-P
> >
> > But that's not what it's about. We are not in the position to
>change an alphabet that is not OURS to change. This is simply about
>the fact that you can't sell an alphabet as Shavian if it ISN'T
>SHAVIAN!
>
>And yet there's no complaints at all about the so called "Shaw
>Alphabet" at shawalphabet.com, even though it bears no resemblance
>whatsoever to the Kingsley Read font, even though it claims to do so.
>Things to make you go hmmm... L8r.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>




_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com


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

--- In shavian@y..., kirk desimus <kfs111@y...> wrote:
>
> wAr iz e fIlz Area?

It's in the menu just to the left of the messages. From top to
bottom, it says Home, Messages, Post, Chat, Files. BTW, I've made a
couple of minor changes since the upload. I'll be uploading a new
version of it tonight. L8r.



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1182690/R=0/*http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-1736-1039-336>

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

--- In shavian@y..., "Paul Vandenbrink" <pvandenbrink11@h...> wrote:
> Hi Rubik
>
> Sorry that the name of my website www.shawalphabet.com appears
deceptive.

Not just the name, but the content, too. I took a look at every page
I could find and it appears that you're claiming that Kingsley Read
created the font on your site. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

> I developed this Revision of the Shaw Alphabet, to further solve
the problem
> where the different accents of English can result in different
spellings of
> the same word. The majority of English accent variations seem to
reside
> mostly in the vowel sounds.

I'm curious. If I'm understanding your page correctly, the only time
an actual vowel character is used is when it's proceeded by a glottal
stop, eg. uh-oh, Da'an, Zo'or, or buy EFC merchandise at "the
Sto'or!", while in every other case only the KIND of vowel is shown.
It also apprears that a, e, and i are classed as the same kind of
vowel, so how would one differentiate between the words bag, beg, and
big? How about bog and bug, which are also the same kind of vowel?
What's the difference between horizontal and vertical vowel types?
How about the tight curl and the loose curl?

> But in any case I call this alphabet, the Revised Shaw Alphabet as
opposed
> to the original Shavian.

Interesting. I really had to dig to find mention of it being a
revised version. 6 of the 7 main pages make no mention of it.

> P.S. I expect to make changes in the site to show exactly how the
new
> letters are derived from the original Shavian Alphabet. But that
will take
> some time.

Cool. I'll be interested in seeing it when it's done. L8r.



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=228862.2128520.3581629.2204139/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1182689/R=0/*http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/990-1736-1039-335>

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