Shavian eGroup Archive Browser

From: paul vandenbrink
Date: 2003-02-05 18:10:11 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Question on sound differences

Toggle Shavian
Hi Star

I see these differences in an even worse light than you or Hugh.
There are indeed slight (subtle) differences in how these 3 sounds
are sounded, even by Americans. Most Americans, that is.
But every little accent group handles these 3 phonemes differently.
It is not a consistent difference.
So if all of us general Americans wrote our speech honestly, we would
get a hodgepodge of different spellings. Even though I am not rooting
for spelling standardization, I would like to minimize differences in
spelling by intelligant design of the Alphabet. Especially, where the
differences are based on based on slight variations in accent. The
Shaw Alphabet has the most intelligant design that I have seen.
Let's go with that.

Regards, Paul V.



--- In shavian@..., Star Raven <celestraof12worlds@y...>
wrote:
> Are you so sure about that? perhaps instructed to understand the
> differences, most people WOULD hear a difference. Minority or not, I
> think that there is enough of a difference that they were created in
> the first place and should be retained.
>
> --Star
>
> --- Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@b...> wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Star Raven
> > To: shavian@...
> > Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 7:56 PM
> > Subject: Re: [shavian] Question
> >
> >
> >
> > > Mike - the 'air', 'err' and 'array' characters are really
> > optimized
> > > for writing dialects of British English. You shouldn't need
them
> > at
> > > all.
> >
> > I BEG TO DIFFER!!! I use these three in their proper place all
the
> > time. These are very important.
> > You may do, but I suspect you'll find yourself in the minority
over
> > there.
> >
> > You may know where to put the characters (whether or not you
actually
> > hear a distinct difference between them is another matter) but a
hell
> > of a lot of people - TOO MANY people - just CAN'T. They DON'T make
> > any such distinctions.
> >
> > Shavian has a choice.
> > 1) Perpetuate subtle differences like the above and re-educate
people
> > to recognise them,
> > 2) Consolidate subtle differences like the above and let people
write
> > as best they can using the characters provided.
> >
> > Unless you wish to re-train all those who simply do not recognise
the
> > differences (not a wise move), I suggest that Shavian should
> > CONSOLIDATE SUBTLE DIFFERENCES. If you force those users to make a
> > choice between several letters for the same sound, you will only
end
> > up with each user using different characters for the same sound
> > depending on their 'choice', which is a ridiculous state of
affairs.
> > > I would advocate ignoring them and using combinations of
vowel+r.
> > > Basically, 'air' is 'egg'+'roll', and both 'err' and 'array'
are
> > > 'ado'+'roll'.
> >
> > Pay no attention to the man behind the green curtain... those
ARE
> > the
> > vowel + r, only they are already combined to represent the
> > different
> > sound that a vowel makes when followed by R
> > They're not all vowel+r. 'Ado' is the only character to be a
simple
> > ligature.
> >
> > Air and err clearly suffered a 'glyph flip' during printing of the
> > alphabet. Unfortunate, but true. 'Air', if you flip it upside
down,
> > is two 'egg's joined together, with a 'roll' finishing it
off. 'Err'
> > is the same only with two 'ado's. This doubling of the 'egg' and
> > 'ado' indicates the INCREASED LENGTH of those vowels, as
pronounced
> > by British English speakers. American English (GENERAL
pronunciation)
> > makes no distinction between long and short vowels, so the symbols
> > are redundant. The fact that they are flipped only confounds the
> > situation.
> >
> > Why shouldn't you just write 'egg'+'roll'?
> >
> > Hugh B
>
>
> =====
> "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=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=783255787>

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

From: paul vandenbrink
Date: 2003-02-05 18:37:43 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Greetings to a fellow Shavian.

Toggle Shavian
Hi Everyone
I have to agree with Hugh in this matter. (See attached)
Collapsing or consolidating these 2 Shaw phonomes into 1 and the
other changes, should reduce somewhat, the large number of spelling
variants found when people write American accented English with the
Shaw Alphabet.
It is an important step in making the Shaw Alphabet more
International and more American friendly.

Regards, Paul Vandenbrink

P.S. As I said before there will always be some spelling variation,
based on significant pronunciation differences, but it behooves us to
write the words in a logical, consistent manner that minimzes those
differences in pronunciation.

_________________attached______________________

--- In shavian@..., "Hugh Birkenhead" <mixsynth@b...>
wrote:
> Standardised and simple spelling is what this cut down version
allows. It is reduced to simple, clearly discrete, vowel phonemes
that are much more difficult to confuse. If confusion between the
remaining characters does occur, this has been anticipated; the two
pairs of vowel sounds that are often confused for each other are made
to be simple reversals of each other, i.e. 'ash'/'egg' (in words such
as "carrier") and 'ah'/'awe' (in words such as "frost"). Because of
the close visual similarity of these sometimes interchangeable
characters, speed readers should not be slowed down to anywhere near
a large extent as at present. Put more succinctly, all the US-Eng
writer has to do is to try to maintain some degree of distinction
between 'ah'/'awe' (not 'ah' and 'awe' AND 'on') and/or 'ash'/'egg',
but if one is unavoidably interchanged with the other, it's no big
deal to the reader because the characters are so similar to each
other.
>
> I realise I must be sounding like I'm trying to impose this on you
guys. That's far from the truth! I've spent a lot of time on this,
not trying to impose my personal preference (as my own preference had
always been to keep Shavian 'as is') but trying to find the BEST
solution, and shown it to work for me and Paul Vandenbrink so far;
our spellings matched almost exactly together in the Shaw test piece,
where before there had been glaring character differences left right
and centre! And this was with little or no guidance on when to use
characters or anything! The alphabet itself was the limiting factor
in what he could use to write his speech, not a set of
superimposed 'doctrines'.
>
> All I would suggest to anyone in this group is to please check it
out and see if you find it easy to make it 'work' for you. If you do,
and your writing happens to correspond more closely with that of
others, we're in business; if it fails miserably and you hate it, I'm
not too proud to accept your point of view! You can't say fairer than
that, Guv'nor! Try transcribing Shaw's test piece
(http://members.aol.com/RSRICHMOND/shawtest.html) using only the
characters listed. The character table is included in full in one of
my posts from a day or two ago. When you're done, send it to me if
you like, or compare it with my transliteration of the same text on
the Shavian Forum.
>
> Hugh B



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=903987524>

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

From: paul vandenbrink
Date: 2003-02-06 16:33:35 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Greetings to a fellow Shavian.

Toggle Shavian
Hi Hugh

I have a practical matter to discuss.
I know that we do have to try out the new idea to simplify and
clarify the Alphabet for the novice American English Speakers (Star
is specifically excluded from this category).
So I have been adding to my dictionary (word list) in the Shaw Chat
forum at www.shavian.org.
I also put the International Shaw Spelling where it differs from the
original alongside, for the first 50 or so words. I'll finish it up
in a few days. Noticed there is much more "ado".
Please take a look and let me know what you think?
Are there any specific test pieces you have in mind to try out?

Regards, Paul V.

_______________________attached___________________________________

--- In shavian@..., "paul vandenbrink
<pvandenbrink@s...>" <pvandenbrink@s...> wrote:
> Hi Everyone
> I have to agree with Hugh in this matter. (See attached)
> Collapsing or consolidating these 2 Shaw phonomes into 1 and the
> other changes, should reduce somewhat, the large number of spelling
> variants found when people write American accented English with the
> Shaw Alphabet.
> It is an important step in making the Shaw Alphabet more
> International and more American friendly.
>
> Regards, Paul Vandenbrink
>
> P.S. As I said before there will always be some spelling variation,
> based on significant pronunciation differences, but it behooves us
to
> write the words in a logical, consistent manner that minimzes those
> differences in pronunciation.
>
> _________________attached______________________
>
> --- In shavian@..., "Hugh Birkenhead" <mixsynth@b...>
> wrote:
> > Standardised and simple spelling is what this cut down version
> allows. It is reduced to simple, clearly discrete, vowel phonemes
> that are much more difficult to confuse. If confusion between the
> remaining characters does occur, this has been anticipated; the two
> pairs of vowel sounds that are often confused for each other are
made
> to be simple reversals of each other, i.e. 'ash'/'egg' (in words
such
> as "carrier") and 'ah'/'awe' (in words such as "frost"). Because of
> the close visual similarity of these sometimes interchangeable
> characters, speed readers should not be slowed down to anywhere
near
> a large extent as at present. Put more succinctly, all the US-Eng
> writer has to do is to try to maintain some degree of distinction
> between 'ah'/'awe' (not 'ah' and 'awe' AND 'on')
and/or 'ash'/'egg',
> but if one is unavoidably interchanged with the other, it's no big
> deal to the reader because the characters are so similar to each
> other.
> >
> > I realise I must be sounding like I'm trying to impose this on
you
> guys. That's far from the truth! I've spent a lot of time on this,
> not trying to impose my personal preference (as my own preference
had
> always been to keep Shavian 'as is') but trying to find the BEST
> solution, and shown it to work for me and Paul Vandenbrink so far;
> our spellings matched almost exactly together in the Shaw test
piece,
> where before there had been glaring character differences left
right
> and centre! And this was with little or no guidance on when to use
> characters or anything! The alphabet itself was the limiting factor
> in what he could use to write his speech, not a set of
> superimposed 'doctrines'.
> >
> > All I would suggest to anyone in this group is to please check it
> out and see if you find it easy to make it 'work' for you. If you
do,
> and your writing happens to correspond more closely with that of
> others, we're in business; if it fails miserably and you hate it,
I'm
> not too proud to accept your point of view! You can't say fairer
than
> that, Guv'nor! Try transcribing Shaw's test piece
> (http://members.aol.com/RSRICHMOND/shawtest.html) using only the
> characters listed. The character table is included in full in one
of
> my posts from a day or two ago. When you're done, send it to me if
> you like, or compare it with my transliteration of the same text on
> the Shavian Forum.
> >
> > Hugh B



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=218129165>

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

From: Star Raven
Date: 2003-02-07 13:51:45 #
Subject: Re: [shavian] Question

Toggle Shavian
Alright I must assert once again, that I AM american and I can hear a
differance. Just leave it, and STOP trying to assume that all americans
are blind, deaf and dumb. I am a traditionalist, I do like the way that
the shavian alphabet is constructed. I do see probblems, the ng-h
reversal for instance. But why, if there is a difference to me and
others from the states, are you so insistant that there needs to be a
"smaller and simpler" version for Americans?

--Star

--- Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@...> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Star Raven
> To: shavian@...
> Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 4:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [shavian] Question
>
>
> Are you so sure about that? perhaps instructed to understand the
> differences, most people WOULD hear a difference. Minority or not,
> I
> think that there is enough of a difference that they were created
> in
> the first place and should be retained.
> I am 100% sure. In all the four years I've been using this message
> board, every time I tried to help confused US-Eng speakers out with
> the 'ah'/'on' distinction, they kept telling me, they just DO NOT
> hear a difference. Only upon checking official pronunciation guides
> of most American dictionaries did I finally start to see this for
> myself. It only clicked when I consulted with phoneticians from my
> own University's Linguistics department.
>
> If by 'instructing' you mean giving them a list, as long as you are
> tall, of words that take either character, forget it. They just DO
> NOT know that sound AT ALL. Unlike Traditional Orthography's absolute
> consistence in describing when to use 'roll' (which makes it easier
> for Brit-Eng speakers to know when to include it), it is far from
> consistent with 'ah' and 'on'. Take "wallow" (which would take 'on')
> - it sure as hell doesn't rhyme with "shallow" ('ash'), or even
> "wall" ('awe'), "marshall" ('ado'), etc. Also remember that Brit-Eng
> speakers DO RECOGNISE AND KNOW the 'roll' sound, whereas most US-Eng
> DO NOT RECOGNISE AND DO NOT KNOW the short 'ah' sound.
>
> "I think that there is enough of a difference that they were created
> in
> the first place and should be retained."
>
> For the majority of US-Eng speakers (quite a sizeable majority),
> there is NO difference between them, let alone 'enough of' a
> difference.
>
> The Shaw Alphabet was no "god's gift to the English language". IT HAS
> PROBLEMS, and we should not be afraid to address them! If we keep our
> blinkers on and keep repeating "it was created that way and should
> stay that way", the alphabet will become - or, rather, REMAIN -
> nothing more than a museum piece.
>
> Modernising the alphabet in the way I describe does not change
> Shavian very much phonemically, and alters no existing characters
> visually. All the basic non-ligatured letterforms, bar TWO which are
> merged with others, remain exactly as they always have been,
> phonemically and visually.
>
> The 'magic' of Shavian remains!
>
> Hugh B


=====
"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=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=334881966>

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

From: Star Raven
Date: 2003-02-07 14:20:41 #
Subject: Re: [shavian] Re: Question

Toggle Shavian
I was referring to you, using an allusion to the wizard of oz. :)

---Star

PS, My modem thing had crashed, comp is alright...

--- "paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink@...>"
<pvandenbrink@...> wrote:
> Hi Star
> Good to hear your back.
> I hope your computer is feeling better.
> When you say, the man behind the Green curtain, is that a reference
> to the Charlatan who passed himself off as the Wizard of Oz?
>
> Regards, Paul V.
>
> --- In shavian@..., Star Raven <celestraof12worlds@y...>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Mike - the 'air', 'err' and 'array' characters are really
> optimized
> > > for writing dialects of British English. You shouldn't need them
> at
> > > all.
> >
> > I BEG TO DIFFER!!! I use these three in their proper place all the
> > time. These are very important.
> >
> > >
> > > I would advocate ignoring them and using combinations of vowel+r.
> > > Basically, 'air' is 'egg'+'roll', and both 'err' and 'array' are
> > > 'ado'+'roll'.
> >
> > Pay no attention to the man behind the green curtain... those ARE
> the
> > vowel + r, only they are already combined to represent the
> different
> > sound that a vowel makes when followed by R
> >
> > --Star
> >
> > =====
> > "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
>
>


=====
"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=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=633377478>

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

From: Star Raven
Date: 2003-02-07 14:31:25 #
Subject: Re: [shavian] Re: Greetings to a fellow Shavian.

Toggle Shavian
I believe there should be a small simple alphabet of ten or twenty
letters -r for the novice red coats.

I'm glad to have been excluded :)
--Star

--- "paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink@...>"
<pvandenbrink@...> wrote:
> Hi Hugh
>
> I have a practical matter to discuss.
> I know that we do have to try out the new idea to simplify and
> clarify the Alphabet for the novice American English Speakers (Star
> is specifically excluded from this category).
> So I have been adding to my dictionary (word list) in the Shaw Chat
> forum at www.shavian.org.
> I also put the International Shaw Spelling where it differs from the
> original alongside, for the first 50 or so words. I'll finish it up
> in a few days. Noticed there is much more "ado".
> Please take a look and let me know what you think?
> Are there any specific test pieces you have in mind to try out?
>
> Regards, Paul V.


=====
"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=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=723639895>

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

From: Hugh Birkenhead
Date: 2003-02-07 14:47:51 #
Subject: Re: [shavian] Question

Toggle Shavian
----- Original Message -----
From: Star Raven <mailto:celestraof12worlds@...>

Alright I must assert once again, that I AM american and I can hear a
differance. Just leave it, and STOP trying to assume that all americans
are blind, deaf and dumb. I am a traditionalist, I do like the way that
the shavian alphabet is constructed. I do see probblems, the ng-h
reversal for instance. But why, if there is a difference to me and
others from the states, are you so insistant that there needs to be a
"smaller and simpler" version for Americans?

Have I hit a nerve?

IT IS NOT A SMALLER AND SIMPLER VERSION FOR AMERICANS. NEITHER AM I SAYING AMERICANS ARE INCOMPETENT.

Why are you reading it the way you are?

The cut alphabet is only a response to GENUINE PROBLEMS. They have been discussed ad infinitum for years. Where were you when these debates were taking place? I have had DOZENS of Americans come to me TELLING me they do not observe a difference. If they don't come to me and tell me, I notice it clearly in their writing. I also had it confirmed by the Merriam-Webster dictionary, and then by a phonetician at my University. You are probably the FIRST I have heard from who observes a difference. Perhaps you could transliterate Shaw's test piece into traditional Shavian and we will see how 'well' you observe it? I've never seen your Shavian writing.

May I remind you that Samuel Johnson was a traditionalist, and look what his 'traditionalist' dictionary did to English spelling.

Hugh B

From: paul vandenbrink
Date: 2003-02-07 17:27:12 #
Subject: [shavian] Greetings to fellow Shavians

Toggle Shavian
Hi Hugh & Star

It seems that we have good theory, and now we need to experiment with
it, in order to determine if our solution is both practical and
useful. (Not necesesarily (Damn T.O.? !!!) the same thing.) We need a
few American and Australian Test subjects. (The word Guinea Pigs is
no longer P.C.) For example, I noticed in my tests that the
letter "ado" once merged with "on" and partially with "array"
proliferates to the extent that it seems to overwhelm the rest of the
vowel letters.
Anymore suggested test pieces, anyone? I would suggest an American
exerpt as that is the speech phenomena (Damn! Is that right?) that we
are trying to capture.
Elusive as it seem, as reported by our colleague Star.

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. Star, Much as I feel honored to be compared favorably to any
literary figure, I feel that the justly maligned Wizard of Oz, is
beyond my capacity, both in machination, and in shear theatrical
display. Beside have I ever asked you to change the Hugh you view, or
put on blinders of any kind.
My Dear Lady. How Unfair. :)
_________________attached________________________________


--- In shavian@..., "Hugh Birkenhead" <mixsynth@b...>
wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Star Raven
>
>
> Alright I must assert once again, that I AM american and I can
hear a
> differance. Just leave it, and STOP trying to assume that all
americans
> are blind, deaf and dumb. I am a traditionalist, I do like the
way that
> the shavian alphabet is constructed. I do see probblems, the ng-h
> reversal for instance. But why, if there is a difference to me and
> others from the states, are you so insistant that there needs to
be a
> "smaller and simpler" version for Americans?
> Have I hit a nerve?
>
> IT IS NOT A SMALLER AND SIMPLER VERSION FOR AMERICANS. NEITHER AM I
SAYING AMERICANS ARE INCOMPETENT.
>
> Why are you reading it the way you are?
>
> The cut alphabet is only a response to GENUINE PROBLEMS. They have
been discussed ad infinitum for years. Where were you when these
debates were taking place? I have had DOZENS of Americans come to me
TELLING me they do not observe a difference. If they don't come to me
and tell me, I notice it clearly in their writing. I also had it
confirmed by the Merriam-Webster dictionary, and then by a
phonetician at my University. You are probably the FIRST I have heard
from who observes a difference. Perhaps you could transliterate
Shaw's test piece into traditional Shavian and we will see how 'well'
you observe it? I've never seen your Shavian writing.
>
> May I remind you that Samuel Johnson was a traditionalist, and look
what his 'traditionalist' dictionary did to English spelling.
>
> Hugh B



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=983019223>

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

From: George
Date: 2003-02-08 16:06:03 #
Subject: [shavian] Conversion app

Toggle Shavian
To tell you the truth, I just had a rather disappoointing
experience.

A couple of days ago I uploaded - to the Read Alphabet group - a
MacIntosh app that will convert Roman spelled english test into
QuickScript. One might think that it would cause a stir or that
someone might say "Gee, good job!"

I guess they are are all on PC's and really don't give a ...

So, before I spend any time on adapting it to Shavian, is there
anyone on THIS group that uses a Mac?




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=770135473>

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

From: Craig Butz
Date: 2003-02-08 18:17:04 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Conversion app

Toggle Shavian
> So, before I spend any time on adapting it to Shavian, is there
> anyone on THIS group that uses a Mac?

One avid mac user right here!

Craig



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.2891370.4259126.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=456712605>

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