Shavian eGroup Archive Browser

by Dr. John Wells, University College, London.
English Accents and their Implications for Spelling Reform
From an article published in the Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society

5. SPELL TO SHOW ALL CONTRASTS?

5.1 Maximalism and minimalist

Logically there are two extreme positions one can adopt towards phonemic contrasts. The maximalist position would say our orthography must reflect all the contrasts that anyone makes, and the minimalist position would say we should reflect only those that everyone makes.

5.2 Problems of maximal contrast

The maximalist position would lead to very undesirable consequences, as the following examples show. Many southern English make a longer vowel in bad than in lad and may even have minimal pairs between the name Sally and the verb to sally, or between shandy the long drink and brandy the short drink; obviously spelling should ignore this distinction. Likewise some Scots distinguish tide:tied. The point here is not the quality of the vowels as such, but whether contrasts are made between vowels in different sets of words. In fact for these Scots the difference between the diphthong in tie#d and that in tide reflects the presence of a grammatical boundary before the suffix in the first but not the second. They make a similar distinction between the diphthong in Fife and that in five, but here it depends on the identity of the following consonant. So this distinction is on the whole predictable, and can accordingly be ignored. In Northern Ireland and a few other places they disti nguish days and daze; we are obviously going to have to ignore that, too, as we must the contrast between late and eight or mane and main made in various parts of Britain, for historical reasons reflected in traditional orthography.

5.3 Who needs the distinctions?

Then there is a contrast within the lexical set NURSE, where English and Americans make no distinction; but the Scots and Irish may distinguish pearl and curl, for example, contrasting them in the same way as perry and curry; and they may well make a similar distinction between Hertz and hurts, or fir and fur. That is a kind of justification for present spellings, which accurately reflect this distinction (though sometimes writing the first vowel ear, as in pearl, sometimes er, as in defer). But if, like New Spelling, we abolish that distinction, then we are ignoring that contrast, which is a real one for millions of Scots and Irish. English or Americans will typically say these distinctions are subtleties they can't possibly cope with. The only point I would make is that those who make the distinction are going to feel that logically it ought to be retained in a reformed spelling, and they are going to have to be convinced otherwise if we want to abolish it.

5.4 Contrasts matter, not sounds

In all of this we must remember that it doesn't matter what the actual phonetic realization is; what is important is the network of contrasts, because that is what the orthography must reflect. If we take, say, the word soap where we all use our long-o vowel, it doesn't matter what precise quality of vowel or diphthong an individual speaker uses, provided he or she uses the same sound in rope, goat, coat and all other words in the same lexical set.

6 PROBLEMS OF MINIMAL CONTRAST

6.1 A Jamaican merger

The minimalist position, spelling only the contrasts everybody makes, has difficulties too. One might think everybody contrasts pat and pot (the lexical sets TRAP and LOT), but that is not so. Jamaicans, for example, typically say /pat/ for both. Now people may object that there are not many Jamaicans, so they can be ignored; but as a group they have very special problems with English spelling. Whereas other English-speakers mainly follow their pronunciation in spelling the a - o contrast (ignoring one or two exceptional words like wash), for Jamaicans it is hard to decide which spelling is right and what therefore is also the posh pronunciation. Ordinary Jamaicans say /rat/ both for the animal and for putrefaction, and have to learn which to spell rat and which rot. A social factor is also involved: to speak educated Jamaican, they have to learn to distinguish rat and rot in pronunciation, too, as other English-speakers do. But if we are aiming to lighten the burden of arbit rary spelling distinctions, no reform project I have ever seen solves this difficulty for an important group of West Indians.


6.2 A southern US merger

Then there is the START-NORTH distinction, exemplified in pairs such as farm and form. It is not only the Jamaicans that tend to pronounce these identically; many Americans speaking popular accents in the south do so too. They have a test phrase about being born in a barn, and it is well known that some people confuse or reverse the two: country bumpkins in the southern states are ridiculed as being barn in a born, with the typical confusion of people trying to introduce a contrast into their speech that they don't natively have. Again, I think on balance we must retain the spelling distinction in those sets of words. But it will constitute a difficulty for some.

6.3 Another southern US merger

Many American Southerners, of all social classes, and including most Californians, don't distinguish the vowels in KIT and DRESS before nasals, and so make no difference between pin and pen (hence the terms writing-pen and stick-pin, to make the distinction clear). Listen to Jim Reeves singing Lord, give me strength, where the strength begins just like string. It would be rather drastic, I think, to abolish this contrast and write pin and pen identically in a reformed orthography, but unless we did, it would cause many American Southerners a big spelling problem. For them the logical reformed spelling of many might be minny rather than the menny that seems logical to the rest of us.

7. FEASIBLE MERGERS

7.1 FOOT and GOOSE

New Spelling was criticized for distinguishing the vowels of the lexical sets FOOT and GOOSE, and this distinction, I think, could indeed be dispensed with. Consider the pair good and mood, which for most of us do not rhyme perfectly. However in Scotland they do, and also in Ulster. Forcing a contrast of spelling with good - muud, as New Spelling does, is therefore an arbitrary extra distinction from the point of view of the Scots and the people of Northern Ireland. As there are very few word-pairs distinguished in this way (only pull - pool, full - fool, look - Luke, and a few pairs involving inflected forms, such as wood - wooed, could - cooed), I think we wouldn't suffer too seriously if we ignore the distinction.

7.2 Functional load of sh - zh

What is involved here is the important question of what is known technically as functional load, that is, the number of words that are distinguished by a given contrast. When the functional load of a contrast is low, then the contrast can be ignored, whereas when the functional load is rather high, then presumably it ought to be reflected in the spelling. Using this criterion, one might well decide not to distinguish the consonant sounds sh and zh, because there are very few word-pairs distinguished by this contrast. There are indeed non-rhyming pairs like pressure - measure, mission - vision, there are no everyday words directly distinguished by this contrast. (We can safely ignore such rarities as Aleutian - allusion, Confucian - confusion.) Rather than impose the non-English-looking zh to furnish a consistent spelling for the voiced member of this pair of sounds, we might write sh for both. This would have the welcome side-effect of remopving the uncertainty that would oth erwise arise in words such as Asian, where some speakers use one sound and some the other.

source: JSSS33 [subscription $10/yr for two 40p journals. Membership £20]
[Contact the editor, Steve Bett, for details stbett@...]




<http://www.unifon.org/stiv-bet-hotsuma16.gif> <mailto:stbett@...> <http://www.unifon.org/saundspel.html>
To join SAUNDSPEL - The Phonology Forum
send a blank email to saundspel-subscribe@...

________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?
Free online calendar <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/tag/*http://calendar.yahoo.com> with sync to Outlook(TM).

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=247865.3355058.4641699.1512248/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1482387/R=0/*http://ads.x10.com/?bHlhaG9vaG0xLmRhd=1054242164%3eM=247865.3355058.4641699.1512248/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1482387/R=1=1054242164%3eM=247865.3355058.4641699.1512248/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1482387/R=2>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=247865.3355058.4641699.1512248/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1482387/rand=246528693>

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

The first paragraph is pretty bad...I've noticed that I got
progressively better, and it's quite obvious that I did when reading
my work. This was definitely a learning experience, and I hope to
sometime go back and correct all the mistakes I made.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/CNxFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

Hi Steve
Thanks for clarifying the 2 extreme positions for developing an
alphabet that shows the significant pronunciation contrasts.
The concept of Functional Load seems to provide a safety net
preventing us from going to the minimalist position.
I would like to use a more middle of the road position conducive to
writing General American English, while retaining the current Shavian
Orthography. This means that some sounds can be replaced by
either "a" or "u"
either "o" or "y" or "Y"
either "D" or "x"
either "e" or "i"
either "w" or "W"

While ideally based only on pronunciation, I accept in some
circumstances, distinctions made in Roman Orthography, may be used to
guide the selection of which of the 2 Similar sounding Shaw letters
will be used.

For example, "er" might generally be represented by Shaw "D" mapping
and "ur" might be represented by Shaw "x" mapping.

My main consideration is that all the possible indeterminacies be
spelled out ahead of time. Then I can recognize all the different
combinations when I am reading.

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. It is interesting that these common interdeterminacies are
usually in the shorter vowel sounds. I would have trouble accepting a
merge of the letters for two consonant sound even where there only is
a voicing difference. (i.e. sh/zh or th/Dh)


--- In shavian@..., Steve Bett <stbett@y...> wrote:
> by Dr. John Wells, University College,
London.
> English Accents and their Implications for Spelling
Reform
> From an article published in the Journal of the
Simplified Spelling Society
>
> 5. SPELL TO SHOW ALL CONTRASTS?
>
> 5.1 Maximalism and minimalist
>
> Logically there are two extreme positions one can
adopt towards phonemic contrasts. The maximalist position
would say our orthography must reflect all the contrasts that
anyone makes, and the minimalist position would say we should
reflect only those that everyone makes.
>
> 5.2 Problems of maximal contrast
>
> The maximalist position would lead to very undesirable
consequences, as the following examples show. Many southern
English make a longer vowel in bad than in lad and may even
have minimal pairs between the name Sally and the verb to
sally, or between shandy the long drink and brandy the short
drink; obviously spelling should ignore this distinction.
Likewise some Scots distinguish tide:tied. The point here is not
the quality of the vowels as such, but whether contrasts are
made between vowels in different sets of words. In fact for
these Scots the difference between the diphthong in tie#d and
that in tide reflects the presence of a grammatical boundary
before the suffix in the first but not the second. They make a
similar distinction between the diphthong in Fife and that in
five, but here it depends on the identity of the following
consonant. So this distinction is on the whole predictable,
and can accordingly be ignored. In Northern Ireland and a few
other places they disti nguish days and daze; we are obviously
going to have to ignore that, too, as we must the contrast
between late and eight or mane and main made in various parts
of Britain, for historical reasons reflected in traditional
orthography.
>
> 5.3 Who needs the distinctions?
>
> Then there is a contrast within the lexical set
NURSE, where English and Americans make no distinction; but
the Scots and Irish may distinguish pearl and curl, for
example, contrasting them in the same way as perry and curry;
and they may well make a similar distinction between Hertz and
hurts, or fir and fur. That is a kind of justification for
present spellings, which accurately reflect this distinction
(though sometimes writing the first vowel ear, as in pearl,
sometimes er, as in defer). But if, like New Spelling, we
abolish that distinction, then we are ignoring that contrast,
which is a real one for millions of Scots and Irish. English
or Americans will typically say these distinctions are subtleties
they can't possibly cope with. The only point I would make is
that those who make the distinction are going to feel that
logically it ought to be retained in a reformed spelling, and
they are going to have to be convinced otherwise if we want to
abolish it.
>
> 5.4 Contrasts matter, not sounds
>
> In all of this we must remember that it doesn't matter what
the actual phonetic realization is; what is important is the
network of contrasts, because that is what the orthography
must reflect. If we take, say, the word soap where we all use
our long-o vowel, it doesn't matter what precise quality of
vowel or diphthong an individual speaker uses, provided he or
she uses the same sound in rope, goat, coat and all other
words in the same lexical set.
>
> 6 PROBLEMS OF MINIMAL CONTRAST
>
> 6.1 A Jamaican merger
>
> The minimalist position, spelling only the contrasts
everybody makes, has difficulties too. One might think
everybody contrasts pat and pot (the lexical sets TRAP and
LOT), but that is not so. Jamaicans, for example, typically
say /pat/ for both. Now people may object that there are not
many Jamaicans, so they can be ignored; but as a group they
have very special problems with English spelling. Whereas
other English-speakers mainly follow their pronunciation in
spelling the a - o contrast (ignoring one or two exceptional
words like wash), for Jamaicans it is hard to decide which
spelling is right and what therefore is also the posh
pronunciation. Ordinary Jamaicans say /rat/ both for the
animal and for putrefaction, and have to learn which to spell
rat and which rot. A social factor is also involved: to speak
educated Jamaican, they have to learn to distinguish rat and
rot in pronunciation, too, as other English-speakers do. But
if we are aiming to lighten the burden of arbit rary spelling
distinctions, no reform project I have ever seen solves this
difficulty for an important group of West
Indians.
> 6.2 A southern US merger
>
> Then there is the START-NORTH distinction,
exemplified in pairs such as farm and form. It is not only the
Jamaicans that tend to pronounce these identically; many
Americans speaking popular accents in the south do so too.
They have a test phrase about being born in a barn, and it is
well known that some people confuse or reverse the two:
country bumpkins in the southern states are ridiculed as being
barn in a born, with the typical confusion of people trying to
introduce a contrast into their speech that they don't
natively have. Again, I think on balance we must retain the
spelling distinction in those sets of words. But it will constitute
a difficulty for some.
>
> 6.3 Another southern US merger
>
> Many American Southerners, of all social classes,
and including most Californians, don't distinguish the vowels
in KIT and DRESS before nasals, and so make no difference
between pin and pen (hence the terms writing-pen and stick-
pin, to make the distinction clear). Listen to Jim Reeves
singing Lord, give me strength, where the strength begins just
like string. It would be rather drastic, I think, to abolish
this contrast and write pin and pen identically in a reformed
orthography, but unless we did, it would cause many American
Southerners a big spelling problem. For them the logical
reformed spelling of many might be minny rather than the menny
that seems logical to the rest of us.
>
> 7. FEASIBLE MERGERS
>
> 7.1 FOOT and GOOSE
>
> New Spelling was criticized for distinguishing the
vowels of the lexical sets FOOT and GOOSE, and this
distinction, I think, could indeed be dispensed with. Consider
the pair good and mood, which for most of us do not rhyme
perfectly. However in Scotland they do, and also in Ulster. Forcing
a contrast of spelling with good - muud, as New Spelling does,
is therefore an arbitrary extra distinction from the point of
view of the Scots and the people of Northern Ireland. As there
are very few word-pairs distinguished in this way (only pull -
pool, full - fool, look - Luke, and a few pairs involving
inflected forms, such as wood - wooed, could - cooed), I think
we wouldn't suffer too seriously if we ignore the distinction.
>
> 7.2 Functional load of sh - zh
>
> What is involved here is the important question of
what is known technically as functional load, that is, the
number of words that are distinguished by a given contrast.
When the functional load of a contrast is low, then the
contrast can be ignored, whereas when the functional load is
rather high, then presumably it ought to be reflected in the
spelling. Using this criterion, one might well decide not to
distinguish the consonant sounds sh and zh, because there are
very few word-pairs distinguished by this contrast. There are
indeed non-rhyming pairs like pressure - measure, mission -
vision, there are no everyday words directly distinguished by
this contrast. (We can safely ignore such rarities as
Aleutian - allusion, Confucian - confusion.) Rather than impose
the non-English-looking zh to furnish a consistent spelling
for the voiced member of this pair of sounds, we might write
sh for both. This would have the welcome side-effect of
remopving the uncertainty that would oth erwise arise in words
such as Asian, where some speakers use one sound and some the
other.
> source: JSSS33 [subscription $10/yr for two 40p
journals. Membership ?0]
> [Contact the editor, Steve Bett, for details
stbett@y...]
>
>
>
>
> To join SAUNDSPEL - The Phonology Forum
> send a blank email to saundspel-subscribe@...
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
FREE Cell Phones with up to $400 Cash Back!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_bBUKB/vYxFAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

This question has been asked before a few times (by me), but with 6-month or so intervals in between, and I know technology and awareness always progress, so let's ask it again... Does anyone in this group use any Instant Messaging software?

This includes AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), ICQ, MSN Messenger (Windows Messenger on Windows XP) or Yahoo Instant Messenger.

It would be good to get some Shavian conversations going (as most of the above media support messaging in alternative typefaces), or even just to maintain general contact.

My contact details are as follows if anyone is up for the idea:
AIM: mixsynth2
ICQ: 17473487
MSN: mixsynth@... <mailto:mixsynth@...>
Yahoo: mixsynth

All the best
Hugh B

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1482387/R=0/SIG=16ncj14sn/*http://ads.x10.com/?bHlhaG9vaG0xLmRhd=1054913681%3eM=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1482387/R=1=1054913681%3eM=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1482387/R=2>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=247865.3355058.4641699.1261774/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1482387/rand=713431021>

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: 266.1.0 - Release Date: 18/02/2005

Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
> This question has been asked before a few times (by me), but with
> 6-month or so intervals in between, and I know technology and awareness
> always progress, so let's ask it again... Does anyone in this group use
> any Instant Messaging software?
>
> This includes AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), ICQ, MSN Messenger (Windows
> Messenger on Windows XP) or Yahoo Instant Messenger.
>
> It would be good to get some Shavian conversations going (as most of the
> above media support messaging in alternative typefaces), or even just to
> maintain general contact.
>
> My contact details are as follows if anyone is up for the idea:
> AIM: mixsynth2
> ICQ: 17473487
> MSN: mixsynth@... <mailto:mixsynth@...>
> Yahoo: mixsynth
>
> All the best
> Hugh B

Hugh, thanks for mentioning this.
I'm on Yahoo Messenger, Id: crookedcricker

Unfortunately Yahoo doesn't have good Linux support for Messenger, and
they haven't gone beyond the beta version. That version has a major bug
which makes it impossible to choose a proper font. You're lucky if you
can see anything at all, in any font! Since I use Linux for most of my
day-to-day operations, this means I often am unable to converse using
Shavian. Hopefully though things will be resolved (sometime before the
world ends!)

--
Ethan


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.1.0 - Release Date: 18/02/2005

Ethan incurred the wrath of Bob on Jun 7, by saying

>Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
>> This question has been asked before a few times (by me), but with
>> 6-month or so intervals in between, and I know technology and awareness
>> always progress, so let's ask it again... Does anyone in this group use
>> any Instant Messaging software?
>>
>> This includes AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), ICQ, MSN Messenger (Windows
>> Messenger on Windows XP) or Yahoo Instant Messenger.
>>
[snip]
>
>Unfortunately Yahoo doesn't have good Linux support for Messenger, and
>they haven't gone beyond the beta version. That version has a major bug
>which makes it impossible to choose a proper font. You're lucky if you
>can see anything at all, in any font! Since I use Linux for most of my
>day-to-day operations, this means I often am unable to converse using
>Shavian. Hopefully though things will be resolved (sometime before the
>world ends!)

Have you tried Gaim? I think I've used it to type Shavian in the past,
on a Red Hat system. yes, it does Yahoo (that's what I mainly use when
I IM). Unfortunately, my Gentoo system is too generally hosed right
now, esp. w.r.t. GNOME, to be worrying about trying to install
non-packaged fonts and get that working.

--
Cheers,
Bob Schmertz


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.1.0 - Release Date: 18/02/2005

06/07/03 2:26:44 AM, Bob Schmertz <rschmertz@...> wrote:

>Ethan incurred the wrath of Bob on Jun 7, by saying
>
>>Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
>>> This question has been asked before a few times (by me), but with
>>> 6-month or so intervals in between, and I know technology and awareness
>>> always progress, so let's ask it again... Does anyone in this group use
>>> any Instant Messaging software?
>>>
>>> This includes AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), ICQ, MSN Messenger (Windows
>>> Messenger on Windows XP) or Yahoo Instant Messenger.
>>>
>[snip]
>>
>>Unfortunately Yahoo doesn't have good Linux support for Messenger, and
>>they haven't gone beyond the beta version. That version has a major bug
>>which makes it impossible to choose a proper font. You're lucky if you
>>can see anything at all, in any font! Since I use Linux for most of my
>>day-to-day operations, this means I often am unable to converse using
>>Shavian. Hopefully though things will be resolved (sometime before the
>>world ends!)
>
>Have you tried Gaim? I think I've used it to type Shavian in the past,
>on a Red Hat system. yes, it does Yahoo (that's what I mainly use when
>I IM). Unfortunately, my Gentoo system is too generally hosed right
>now, esp. w.r.t. GNOME, to be worrying about trying to install
>non-packaged fonts and get that working.
>
>--
>Cheers,
>Bob Schmertz

Hey, thanks for mentioning that, Bob. No, I haven't tried using Gaim with Yahoo
in Shavian, but since you mentioned it, I will have to check it out. I don't
have any real problems with fonts on my system. In fact I think I have too many
fonts! With all my Windows fonts, downloaded fonts, fonts of my own design, and
those that came with my distro (Mandrake 9) I'm up to my ears in fonts!

Installing fonts in Linux can be a difficult and complicated process with some
distributions. But with Mandrake they have a fonts module for their control
panel, called drakfont, and it does all the work for you. You just browse to
your font location and tell it to install the font.

--
Ethan




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

'K... Im an american. I just joined this group. Real name = Bryan,
but Faraday is my cat's name. i wanted to see how much Spam i would
get from my Yahoo account. my cat has been approved for several
credit cards so far, and has "won" several thousand dollars..
anyway, on to shavian. Americans pronounce so many things
differently.. especially the whole "r" thing. i've downloaded and
deciphered the five orange pips, and several other shavian stories,
but am having difficulties cuz everything is so... british sounding.
are there any booke with american accents that i can download or
read? I've done so much Shavian that my roommates say im stahting to
sound slahtly british, dahling. also... isn't the "egg" sound
phonetically identical to "age"??? or do the redcoats
pronounce "egg" to rhyme with "peg" or "beg"??? we also pronounce
Ado/up the same. comments??? answers??? thanx, friends!!!


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the
shavian group:

How did YOU first hear about Shavian?

o Stumbled upon it on the 'Net
o Read about it in a book (Textbook, Shaw Biography, etc.)
o Androcles & The Lion
o Told about it by a friend or relative
o Other


To vote, please visit the following web page:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/surveys?id=1102873

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups
web site listed above.

Thanks!







------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

On 8 Jun 2003 at 0:23, Faraday Fordham wrote:

> isn't the "egg" sound phonetically identical to "age"??? or do the
> redcoats pronounce "egg" to rhyme with "peg" or "beg"???

I thought it was only Utahns that pronunce "egg" and "leg" to rhyme
with "plague". Looking at your email address, maybe also Idahoans. (Do
you use the same "age" vowel in "pleasure" and "leisure", too? "play-
zhur, lay-zhur"?)

At any rate, "egg" in Shavian is meant to have the same vowel as "peg"
or "set" or "web". (I think those words also all have the same vowel in
General American.)

> we also pronounce Ado/up the same.

I use "ado" in unstressed syllables and "up" in stressed syllables. For
example, "mention" has "ado" in the second syllable, since the first
syllable is stressed (MEN-tion), whereas I use "up" for the second word
in "men shun", since I stress both words equally (MEN SHUN).

Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@...>


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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