Shavian eGroup Archive Browser

ANOTHER APPROACH TO REFORM

A proposal endorsed by a half dozen people on
Saundspel is to promote a standardized PG
[pronunciation guide] writing system.

Linguists would probably object on the grounds that
everyone should learn and use IPA. IPA has made great
strides in the 1990's. It has become a much more
popular PG for dictionaries. ESL teachers now use
this code more than any other to represent English
speech.

The popularity would be increased if the code could be
easily handwritten and keyboarded. A rapid handwritten
phonemic code was Shaw's dream.

Phonemic writing involves the manipulation of 42
symbols each representing one sound segment or
category of sounds.

There is almost an infinite number of vowel sounds
that the human ear can discriminate. For speaking,
however, we need only 14 pure vowels for English and 5
for some Romance langauges. Some languages get by
with four pure vowels.

The problem with the 14 sound categories or phonemes
found in most Germanic languages is that we imported
an alphabet that contained only 5 vowel symbols.

IPA's solution in addition to importing a few Greek
symbols and a few new symbols that Isaac Pitman and
others had developed was to ROTATE the letters. When
you are setting type by hand, this is a clever easy
solution. Today, it is not that easy.

Those who developed the first computing standards
[ASCII] were not aware of these needs and so neglected
to augment the alphabet. Some augmentation was added
in the mid 1990's so that all European writing systems
could be fully represented [Latin 1]. The IPA
character set, however, was not popular enough at the
time to be included.

The IPA character set was never designed to be
typographically or aesthetically pleasing. Other than
Henry Sweet, few used it to represent large blocks of
text. The character set could still use a face lift.

Various attempts have been made to find a way to write
phonemic English using what is available on the
keybaord. The proposal below uses the Latin 1
character set which is supported by your Internet
browswer but not by all email systems.

--------------------
wi cánt icspéct güvørnmnts tu txéndj speling
radicli sevrl taimz in ø sentxøri! it wud bi øbsœrd!
EVRÍKING wud hav tu bi ri-printid! <Roly from Oxford>
--------------------

Spanglish is restricted to the ASCII character set and
the QWERTY keyboard.
--------------------
SS: Wi cant expeckt guvernments tu cheinj speling
radicly sevral taimz in a cenchery! It w^d bi absurd!
EVRYTHING w^d hav tu bi reprinted!
--------------------

A few exception rules helps this systematic spelling
system to be more like tradspel. Some of the rules
include:
1. Stress on first syllable unless marked.
2. u before a consonant is always stressed /^/.
3. a is always unstressed in multisyllable words as in
ago /@/. There is no relative stress in a one syllable
word so the about only one syllable schwas is the lone
<a> and the terminal <e> in the. Before this rule was
added, there were always two ways to write a one
syllable word [unstressed or stressed]: e.g. her or
hur. Now <her> has to be interpreted as in IPA as
<hair/eir> unless it is in a unstressed syllable:
<hurder>

Publishers just want standardized writing system with
little if any change in the standard. Since the
publication of Johnson's Dictionary in 1755, they have
had what they wanted.

Few publishers are going to be interested in changing
the spelling of a hundred or more words. The fact
that Webster was able to changed the spelling of over
1000 is truly amazing when you think about the
possible resistance.

It was not possible to extend Webster's reforms when
it was tried again in 1906. The conservatives were
able to get widespread support after the newspapers
published a series of popular editorials against
President Roosevelt had proposed.

So far I have only been able to dig up one editorial
that appeared in the Louisville Courier Journal and
one editorial cartoon. There must of been hundreds of
these. Roosevelt was forced to rescind his executive
order. The only Newspaper to adopt the reform was the
Chicago Tribune. They justified their spellings with
the Funk & Wagnalls Dictionary, the only dictionary to
support the reformed spellings.

Given the potential for conservative backlash. There
is a much better chance for getting dictionary
publishers to change their PG writing systems than to
get the general public to drop even one of their
established spellings.

About the only people that would not be annoyed by
spelling change would be those who had not acquired
the habit. There is probably little chance that you
can democratically change the spelling of the 1000
most common words unless the changes are already
variant spellings.

It might be possible to change from light to LITE
because people are familiar with the alternate
spelling.

If this is true, then the task is one of getting more
phonemic spellings into the dictionary as alternative
or variant spellings.

One of the most productive ways to do this would be to
change the spellings used in the dictionary
pronunciation guide.

The problem with the pronunciation guide is that few
people have any ability to use it for spelling. Sound
spelling skill is lower to day than it was 100 years
ago when millions had to learn it in order to master
shorthand.

If we had a writable pronunciation guide spelling,
this would tend to dictate the ideal spelling.

I think there is a much better chance of changing the
practices of 20,000 people than it is to change the
practices of 200 million.

THE TWO STAGE PROPOSAL

1. Invent a PG spelling that looks good in print
2. Use it as the PG [pronunciation guide] in a
dictionary.
3. Use it as an i.t.a. to teach children how to read
and write.
4. Do not try to replace the traditional writing
system a. until people are almost as familiar with the
PG spelling as they are the traditional spelling and
b. until people can grasp the superiority of the less
complex writing system.

Children in the 6th grade will have learned two
writing systems. One that matches the dictionary PG
and one that matches tradition.

For most common words, they will have two images. In
addition there will be 1000's of words they will be
able to spell phonemically that they will not be able
to spell traditionally without checking the
dictionary.

With a level playing field, the proposal to use PG
spelling rather than traditional spelling will have a
chance of success.

The audience will already know that the PG code is
much easier to spell and they will not find PG
spelling that odd.

At that time the parallel writing system may be able
to overtake the traditional one.

Steve



=====

To join SAUNDSPEL - The Phonology Forum
send a blank email to saundspel-subscribe@...

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

ANOTHER APPROACH TO REFORM

A proposal endorsed by a half dozen people on
Saundspel is to promote a standardized PG
[pronunciation guide] writing system.

Linguists would probably object on the grounds that
everyone should learn and use IPA. IPA has made great
strides in the 1990's. It has become a much more
popular PG for dictionaries. ESL teachers now use
this code more than any other to represent English
speech.

The popularity would be increased if the code could be
easily handwritten and keyboarded. A rapid handwritten
phonemic code was Shaw's dream.

Phonemic writing involves the manipulation of 42
symbols each representing one sound segment or
category of sounds.

There is almost an infinite number of vowel sounds
that the human ear can discriminate. For speaking,
however, we need only 14 pure vowels for English and 5
for some Romance langauges. Some languages get by
with four pure vowels.

The problem with the 14 sound categories or phonemes
found in most Germanic languages is that we imported
an alphabet that contained only 5 vowel symbols.

IPA's solution in addition to importing a few Greek
symbols and a few new symbols that Isaac Pitman and
others had developed was to ROTATE the letters. When
you are setting type by hand, this is a clever easy
solution. Today, it is not that easy.

Those who developed the first computing standards
[ASCII] were not aware of these needs and so neglected
to augment the alphabet. Some augmentation was added
in the mid 1990's so that all European writing systems
could be fully represented [Latin 1]. The IPA
character set, however, was not popular enough at the
time to be included.

The IPA character set was never designed to be
typographically or aesthetically pleasing. Other than
Henry Sweet, few used it to represent large blocks of
text. The character set could still use a face lift.

Various attempts have been made to find a way to write
phonemic English using what is available on the
keybaord. The proposal below uses the Latin 1
character set which is supported by your Internet
browswer but not by all email systems.

--------------------
wi cant icspict g|vxrnmnts tu txindj speling
radicli sevrl taimz in x sentxxri! it wud bi xbsrd!
EVRMKING wud hav tu bi ri-printid! <Roly from Oxford>
--------------------

Spanglish is restricted to the ASCII character set and
the QWERTY keyboard.
--------------------
SS: Wi cant expeckt guvernments tu cheinj speling
radicly sevral taimz in a cenchery! It w^d bi absurd!
EVRYTHING w^d hav tu bi reprinted!
--------------------

A few exception rules helps this systematic spelling
system to be more like tradspel. Some of the rules
include:
1. Stress on first syllable unless marked.
2. u before a consonant is always stressed /^/.
3. a is always unstressed in multisyllable words as in
ago /@/. There is no relative stress in a one syllable
word so the about only one syllable schwas is the lone
<a> and the terminal <e> in the. Before this rule was
added, there were always two ways to write a one
syllable word [unstressed or stressed]: e.g. her or
hur. Now <her> has to be interpreted as in IPA as
<hair/eir> unless it is in a unstressed syllable:
<hurder>

Publishers just want standardized writing system with
little if any change in the standard. Since the
publication of Johnson's Dictionary in 1755, they have
had what they wanted.

Few publishers are going to be interested in changing
the spelling of a hundred or more words. The fact
that Webster was able to changed the spelling of over
1000 is truly amazing when you think about the
possible resistance.

It was not possible to extend Webster's reforms when
it was tried again in 1906. The conservatives were
able to get widespread support after the newspapers
published a series of popular editorials against
President Roosevelt had proposed.

So far I have only been able to dig up one editorial
that appeared in the Louisville Courier Journal and
one editorial cartoon. There must of been hundreds of
these. Roosevelt was forced to rescind his executive
order. The only Newspaper to adopt the reform was the
Chicago Tribune. They justified their spellings with
the Funk & Wagnalls Dictionary, the only dictionary to
support the reformed spellings.

Given the potential for conservative backlash. There
is a much better chance for getting dictionary
publishers to change their PG writing systems than to
get the general public to drop even one of their
established spellings.

About the only people that would not be annoyed by
spelling change would be those who had not acquired
the habit. There is probably little chance that you
can democratically change the spelling of the 1000
most common words unless the changes are already
variant spellings.

It might be possible to change from light to LITE
because people are familiar with the alternate
spelling.

If this is true, then the task is one of getting more
phonemic spellings into the dictionary as alternative
or variant spellings.

One of the most productive ways to do this would be to
change the spellings used in the dictionary
pronunciation guide.

The problem with the pronunciation guide is that few
people have any ability to use it for spelling. Sound
spelling skill is lower to day than it was 100 years
ago when millions had to learn it in order to master
shorthand.

If we had a writable pronunciation guide spelling,
this would tend to dictate the ideal spelling.

I think there is a much better chance of changing the
practices of 20,000 people than it is to change the
practices of 200 million.

THE TWO STAGE PROPOSAL

1. Invent a PG spelling that looks good in print
2. Use it as the PG [pronunciation guide] in a
dictionary.
3. Use it as an i.t.a. to teach children how to read
and write.
4. Do not try to replace the traditional writing
system a. until people are almost as familiar with the
PG spelling as they are the traditional spelling and
b. until people can grasp the superiority of the less
complex writing system.

Children in the 6th grade will have learned two
writing systems. One that matches the dictionary PG
and one that matches tradition.

For most common words, they will have two images. In
addition there will be 1000's of words they will be
able to spell phonemically that they will not be able
to spell traditionally without checking the
dictionary.

With a level playing field, the proposal to use PG
spelling rather than traditional spelling will have a
chance of success.

The audience will already know that the PG code is
much easier to spell and they will not find PG
spelling that odd.

At that time the parallel writing system may be able
to overtake the traditional one.

Steve



=====

To join SAUNDSPEL - The Phonology Forum
send a blank email to saundspel-subscribe@...

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Hi Steve

You made some very good points. You have brilliant concept on how to
introduce a standard improved alphabet.
The pronunciation guide of Standard American English Dictionary is
such a good starting point to introduce a real phonetic alphabet.
Especially
on Electronic Dictionaries you would have the option to find or index
words on either the phonetic or traditional spelling.
But Rather than using Latin 1 as the character set, let me suggest
using existing recognizable characters for the additional sounds, not
already assigned a letter in the alphabet. For example the flipped
over "e" for the Schwa sound. The merged "ae" for the regular
short "a" sound. Maybe a merged or stylized "oe" or "ai" for long "o"
and long "i". The Theta sign and the Thorn for 2 different "th"
sounds. Maybe a merged "oo" for the "good" "u" sound of "put".
Also I suggest that we eliminate, c, q, x, altogether as they have
multiple or redundant pronounciations. Once we see which phonemes
still need a letter, we can create unequivical and recognisable new
letters. And use it as P.G. in new dictionaries. (British or
American). This has the benefit of resembling existing P.G.
Alphabets without the Diagraphs.
This a great first step.
The second step is teaaching the simpler phonetic spelling to the
young. With computer aid you can interactively switch back and forth
between the traditional and the phonetic spelling.
And then you just have to wait for the conservative older generation
to die out.

Regards, Paul V.



--- In shavian@..., Steve Bett <stbett@y...> wrote:
> ANOTHER APPROACH TO REFORM
>
> A proposal endorsed by a half dozen people on
> Saundspel is to promote a standardized PG
> [pronunciation guide] writing system.
>
> > A few exception rules helps this systematic spelling
> system to be more like tradspel. Some of the rules
> include:
> 1. Stress on first syllable unless marked.
> 2. u before a consonant is always stressed /^/.
> 3. a is always unstressed in multisyllable words as in
> ago /@/. There is no relative stress in a one syllable
> word so the about only one syllable schwas is the lone
> <a> and the terminal <e> in the. Before this rule was
> added, there were always two ways to write a one
> syllable word [unstressed or stressed]: e.g. her or
> hur. Now <her> has to be interpreted as in IPA as
> <hair/eir> unless it is in a unstressed syllable:
> <hurder>
>
> Publishers just want standardized writing system with
> little if any change in the standard. Since the
> publication of Johnson's Dictionary in 1755, they have
> had what they wanted.
>
>> It might be possible to change from light to LITE
> because people are familiar with the alternate
> spelling.
>
> If this is true, then the task is one of getting more
> phonemic spellings into the dictionary as alternative
> or variant spellings.
>
> One of the most productive ways to do this would be to
> change the spellings used in the dictionary
> pronunciation guide.
>
>> If we had a writable pronunciation guide spelling,
> this would tend to dictate the ideal spelling.
>
> THE TWO STAGE PROPOSAL
>
> 1. Invent a PG spelling that looks good in print
> 2. Use it as the PG [pronunciation guide] in a
> dictionary.
> 3. Use it as an i.t.a. to teach children how to read
> and write.
> 4. Do not try to replace the traditional writing
> system a. until people are almost as familiar with the
> PG spelling as they are the traditional spelling and
> b. until people can grasp the superiority of the less
> complex writing system.
>
> Children in the 6th grade will have learned two
> writing systems. One that matches the dictionary PG
> and one that matches tradition.
>
> For most common words, they will have two images. In
> addition there will be 1000's of words they will be
> able to spell phonemically that they will not be able
> to spell traditionally without checking the
> dictionary.
>
> The audience will already know that the PG code is
> much easier to spell and they will not find PG
> spelling that odd.
>
> At that time the parallel writing system may be able
> to overtake the traditional one.
>
> Steve
>




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=234081.2814790.4175286.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1327985/R=0/*http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;4870024;7586687;x?http://www.ameriquestmortgage.com/welcome.html?ad=Yahoo01>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=234081.2814790.4175286.1925585/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1327985/rand=719998330>

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

Hi Everyone

I notice that hardly anyone in this User group, uses Hugh's rather
nice Ikonboard Forum at www.shavian.org. It has boards for Shaw
messages and also for English commentaries or Forums. Something
for everyone.

Is there some place else where you can go to get a nice spot
of Shaw chatter?

Regards, Paul V.



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=234081.2821106.4184440.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1327985/R=0/*http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;4870024;7586687;x?http://www.ameriquestmortgage.com/welcome.html?ad=Yahoo01>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=234081.2821106.4184440.1925585/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1327985/rand=626347592>

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

Happy New Year 2003.

I made up a printable year 2003 calendar in Shavian. It's at
http://www.geocities.com/swstephe/shavian/calendar.pdf and
http://www.geocities.com/swstephe/shavian/calendar.html ... the html
version has ads because of geocities and looks a little ugly, but I
put it out there in case someone wants to download it and muck around
with it themselves. I hope my spelling wasn't too bad. I used
rhotic spellings from the BEEP dictionary. I was surprised that the
dictionary doesn't pronounce the middle "r" in February ... guess
it's time to stop correcting people :-( ... The calendar lists
holidays for a USA calendar and highlights them in red. The HTML
version should work in most browsers that support CSS and you will
need Lionspaw font installed.



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

Hi Scott
Thanks for the HTML version.
I noticed a few typos in your calendar.
I put the suggested ccorrections in Hugh's Ikonboard
at www.shavian.org.

Regards, Paul V.

--- In shavian@..., "Scott Stephens <swstephe@y...>"
<swstephe@y...> wrote:
> Happy New Year 2003.
>
> I made up a printable year 2003 calendar in Shavian. It's at
> http://www.geocities.com/swstephe/shavian/calendar.pdf and
> http://www.geocities.com/swstephe/shavian/calendar.html ... the
html
> version has ads because of geocities and looks a little ugly, but I
> put it out there in case someone wants to download it and muck
around
> with it themselves. I hope my spelling wasn't too bad. I used
> rhotic spellings from the BEEP dictionary. I was surprised that
the
> dictionary doesn't pronounce the middle "r" in February ... guess
> it's time to stop correcting people :-( ... The calendar lists
> holidays for a USA calendar and highlights them in red. The HTML
> version should work in most browsers that support CSS and you will
> need Lionspaw font installed.



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=219695.2850578.4203976.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/*http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/N879.ameritrade.yahoo/B1054521.25;sz=300x250;adc=cjx;ord=1042393322590979?>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=219695.2850578.4203976.1925585/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1400475/rand=689668636>

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

Hello, I have always had a great interest in the usage of a phonemic
system for written english, but nothing has surprised me as much as
Shavian. Heh, I knew that George Bernard Shaw was a famed malcontent
with the horrid system (is it a system we may ask?) of English
spelling (via the famous "ghoti" statement)but I never had any idea
he was ever the proponent of an alternate writing system. I have
devised several written alphabets including English applications of
Runic Futharks and the Cyrillic alphabets (merely for æsthetic appeal
and fantasy haha), and something, closely mirroring Shavian, I named
the Linear Anglophonemic System. This system utilizes straight
intersecting lines for plosives and fricatives, angled lines for
approximants (or liquids - which is the official term?), and curves
for vowels. I'll scan an image of it sometime. Recently I have been
trying to develop an international logical phonetic system based on
the IPA phonetic grids. In these systems both position and aspect of
the tongue consist of different written elements which combine to
form a shape. I have tried various "master shapes" to divide into
functional elements, most recently the shape an 8-pointed asterisk
has seemed to work best.

Shavian has indeed changed my ideas of a phonetic system for a
handwritten system, in that one of its major focuses is to remain
smoothly written. At best my international systems consist of lines
going everywhichway.



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1394045/R=0/*http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_3936_5802,FF.html>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1394045/rand=213816150>

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

I read once that Shaw never learned to use a
typewriter, but wrote all his plays in Pitman's
shorthand. English, until recently, had very many
local dialects. (In "Man & Superman," an American,
Malone, considered 'Enry Straker as "a stupid
Englishman who doesn't understand his own language."
But Enry deliberately chose to use his lower-class
dialect as a matter of pride.)

Gerald Baker

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861422.4212389.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1394044/R=0/*http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_3936_5802,FF.html>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861422.4212389.1925585/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1394044/rand=285322531>

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

Hi Chris

Glad to find a fellow Shaw Enthusiast. It just goes to prove my
feeling that the Shavian Alphabet is woefully unpromoted. Even an
alphabet designer such as yourself only stumbles across the Shaw
Alphabet by accident. I hope you try it on the keyboard as well as
just writing it, The keyboard layout for the Shaw Alphabet is quite
logical and easy to learn. You just have to load down and add any one
of the many Shaw fonts to your Windows operating system.

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. The Shaw Alphabet has quite a complete set of phonemes and makes
a good starting point for any serious Al[abet design.

P.P.S. Check out www.shavian.org for more info.
_______________attached______________________________________

--- In shavian@..., gerald baker <glbaker50613@y...>
wrote:
> I read once that Shaw never learned to use a
> typewriter, but wrote all his plays in Pitman's
> shorthand. English, until recently, had very many
> local dialects. (In "Man & Superman," an American,
> Malone, considered 'Enry Straker as "a stupid
> Englishman who doesn't understand his own language."
> But Enry deliberately chose to use his lower-class
> dialect as a matter of pride.)
>
> Gerald Baker
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861422.4212389.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1394044/R=0/*http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_3936_5802,FF.html>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861422.4212389.1925585/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1394044/rand=756657240>

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

I hate to seem a malcontent here, but NOT! The keyboard layout is
strange and badly "related" to TO.

IMHO there are better ways to do this, but that's just me...

--Star

--- "paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink@...>"
<pvandenbrink@...> wrote:
> Hi Chris
>
> Glad to find a fellow Shaw Enthusiast. It just goes to prove my
> feeling that the Shavian Alphabet is woefully unpromoted. Even an
> alphabet designer such as yourself only stumbles across the Shaw
> Alphabet by accident. I hope you try it on the keyboard as well as
> just writing it, The keyboard layout for the Shaw Alphabet is quite
> logical and easy to learn. You just have to load down and add any one
>
> of the many Shaw fonts to your Windows operating system.
>
> Regards, Paul V.
>
> P.S. The Shaw Alphabet has quite a complete set of phonemes and makes
>
> a good starting point for any serious Al[abet design.
>
> P.P.S. Check out www.shavian.org for more info.
> _______________attached______________________________________
>
> --- In shavian@..., gerald baker <glbaker50613@y...>
> wrote:
> > I read once that Shaw never learned to use a
> > typewriter, but wrote all his plays in Pitman's
> > shorthand. English, until recently, had very many
> > local dialects. (In "Man & Superman," an American,
> > Malone, considered 'Enry Straker as "a stupid
> > Englishman who doesn't understand his own language."
> > But Enry deliberately chose to use his lower-class
> > dialect as a matter of pride.)
> >
> > Gerald Baker
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> > http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>
>


=====
"Alright, enough with the storyline, let's get back to the monster killing...Hello!"

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1394046/R=0/*http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_3936_5802,FF.html>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1394046/rand=179863861>

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