Shavian eGroup Archive Browser

Hi Folks,

Have any of you counted how many syllables you could make with Shavian. (One Consonant and one vowel) There are 24 consonants and 16 vowels. That makes 384 possible pure syllables.
And let's see, to stay on track of the current discussions.
1. I vote Hugh as Moderator. (I do like his website.)
2. Esperanto and Ido are fun.
3. If I had a computer of my own to have fonts I would delve more into font discussion.

That's all I can remember of last weeks discussions.

Quickscript, Shavian, Unifon, and Deseret are made for English. So they are only suited for the English Language. I think the only alphabet best suited for all languages is the International Phonetic Alphabet. However, wouldn't it be fun to have a Shavian Alphabet that was equal to I.P.A. in comprehensiveness. At least in my opinion, Shavian is comprehensive enough for all of English's dialects.

Carl

________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=10469/*http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com> - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=251812.3170658.4537139.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1652963/R=0/SIG=11tvulr8i/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60178275&partid=3170658>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=251812.3170658.4537139.1261774/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1652963/rand=880718792>

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

I saw the same article a while ago, but thought it was
a little confusing, (as are many other problems with
missing images, broken links, but more on that later).

I didn't think he proved anything. The color test is
interesting, but what does it prove? It really shows
that our brains are used to reading words to represent
colors, and not used to "reading" colors from words.
The association of a word with its meaning is much
stronger than the association of a word with its
textual color. Try these alternate tests:

1. The original, (I cleaned up the one from the
article, I didn't like the distraction of the blue
borders):

http://www.geocities.com/swstephe/shavian/color1.png

2. In Malay, (for my wife to try out, that is her
native language, but it is based on roman letters and
called "Rumi"). If you don't understand Malay, you
should find it quite easy to read off the colors:

http://www.geocities.com/swstephe/shavian/color2.png

3. Also in Malay, but using the older Arabic script,
"Jawi". Malaysia has practically dropped its use, but
it is still required in my wife's country. This
should be even easier to read the color of the text,
if you don't know Arabic script, because there is no
clue to even the sound:

http://www.geocities.com/swstephe/shavian/color2j.png

4. In Japanese. Try it out on a Japanese friend.
Should be same if you don't understand Japanese/Kanji.
I suppose it is useful for people who understand
Arabic script from above.

http://www.geocities.com/swstephe/shavian/color3.png

5. In Shavian, (because that is who we are:))). See
if you are fluent enough of a reader to get confused
by the meaning of the word:

http://www.geocities.com/swstephe/shavian/color4.png

6. In Truespel. I don't know if the fact that the
webpage started talking about Truespel/Truspel had
anything to do with the test, since Truespel seems to
have plenty of diphthongs. In fact, the only words
that are different from TO are "brown" and "black".
But it is at least a reformed spelling with digraphs.
The meaning will probably stick out quite a bit:

http://www.geocities.com/swstephe/shavian/color5.png

7. In Unifon. You know, for a website
(http://www.unifon.org), that seems to be pushing this
spelling, it sure makes it hard to find the font!
Anyway, I guessed it was probably at
http://www.unifon.org/unifon.ttf and I was right:

http://www.geocities.com/swstephe/shavian/color6.png

I think Unifon is readable enough to generate some
confusion when trying to read off the color of the
text. I thought Unifon was a good idea, except that
it looks like uppercase letters, which tends to make
me think anything written in it seems to shout.

What does it prove? That your brain, (at least one
side of it), associates meaning with words you are
used to. Even the association with reformed roman
spelling is pretty strong. If given the chance to use
Shavian enough, that association would build up again.
I tripped up on the Japanese a little bit because I
can read it, and because the meaning is right out
there, (skipping the pronunciation completely).

I noticed that "pink" is difficult. Many languages
don't have distinct words for this color. The
prounciation is listed as p-ih-ng-k.

(PNG files are "portable network graphics", should be
viewable in most browsers, are derived from GIF, but
don't have the copyright licensing problems and a of
cooler features).

--- Ethan <ethanl@...> wrote:
> I found an interesting experiment which proves a few
> of the problems
> with many reformed spelling systems which use the
> Roman alphabet. It
> can be easier to learn something totally new and
> unfamiliar than to
> change the way you use something like the Roman
> alphabet. Oh, and
> digraphs stink! And, there is a way to make Shavian
> work better with
> the keyboard. Read this whole page:
> http://www.unifon.org/code-switch.html
>
> --
> Ethan
>
>


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Free shipping on all inkjet cartridge & refill kit orders to US & Canada. Low prices up to 80% off. We have your brand: HP, Epson, Lexmark & more.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5510
http://us.click.yahoo.com/GHXcIA/n.WGAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

Hi Ethan & Scott

You have some interesting ideas here.
Let me suggest another point of view from the practical side
While I can easily conceive of an alternate way of spelling English
phonetically using an extended Roman Alphabet, similar to the
Icelandic Alphabet, there would be a number of praactical
difficulties which would prevent it from being widely used. Even if
it was quite logical and consistent and used a minimum of additional
symbols.
For example, It would use only use diagraphs for the 4 common
Dipthongs in English.
The problem is that first you have created an alternate set of
spellings for the most of the English words but not necessarily all.
It is hard enough now to distinguish the meanings of Homonyms in
T.O. It would be confusing for most people to decipher, and even
worse you would quite often have written words with 2 valid readings
based on whether the word was interpreted traditionally or with the
new phonetic system. Since most people learn to spell through
Recognition memory rather than phonetically spelling out the sound
of the word, mistakes are inevitable and likely to be propagated
thru most of the casual, non-computer assisted writing.

There is just no easy way to sort out the 2 spelling systems, if
they use more or less the same symbols. Context ssensitive methods
would break down.

Regards, Paul V.

--- In shavian@..., Scott Stephens <swstephe@y...> wrote:
>
> --- Ethan <ethanl@3...> wrote:
> > Thanks for clarifying. I have looked at a number of
> > these "reformed spelling"
> > systems, and my big gripe about them all is
> > something like this:
> >
> > They almost all use some system of digraphs to
> > replace the missing letters. A
> > few use diacritics. English has many more sounds
> > than there are letters in the
> > Roman alphabet, so to substitute for extra letters,
> > these writing systems use
> > multiple letters. Often they are used in strange
> > combinations, which have to be
> > memorized. Some of the systems have more than one
> > way to spell a sound, and/or
> > more than one sound per spelling. For the most
> > part, they look really bad, if
> > you ask me! They seem overly simplistic a solution.
> > They do look uneducated,
> > because they are using the same letters as TO, but
> > in wierd ways. As far as I
> > know, they all (except perhaps some of the diacritic
> > based systems) increase the
> > length of many words, making writing more difficult
> > and tiresome. This increase
> > of word length through the use of so many digraphs
> > makes reading harder, too.
>
> I saw at least one reformed spelling system that used
> accent marks, and re-introduced "eth" and "theta" and
> avoided multiple letters for a single, pure, sound
> completely and used existing character sets and fonts.
> At first, I didn't pay much attention to it, but now
> that I think about it, it makes more sense. That is
> how many foreign languages, (especially
> non-Indo-European), adopted the Latin alphabet. I was
> concerned about how non-English speakers would react
> to English speakers somehow uniting and adopting
> Shavian. Would they adopt some extended form of
> Shavian for their own languages? If that was the
> trend, why not use a Shavian style method on the IPA,
> instead of just English sounds? Then ask every
> language to use the same phonetic system.
>
> >
> > "Global English" sounds to me like the English
> > equivalent to the French DGLF,
> > «Délégation générale à la langue française», the
> > organization which standardizes
> > the French language. Thanks for explaining it. I
> > don't know that I could get
> > enthusiastic about reformed roman spelling or
> > International English, but it is
> > an interesting study, nonetheless. Still, for now,
> > I think I'll stick with
> > Shavian, the only completely non-roman English
> > alphabet I know of. Why should
> > English be forced to conform to a roman alphabet?
> >
>
> What about non-roman phonetic universal alphabets?
> Why should English change its writing system, leaving
> all the other languages behind. How would a Shavian
> writer write foreign words in French or German? I've
> mentioned abbreviations here, too. I'm also concerned
> about abreviations, which I've written about here
> before too.
>
> > You mention efforts to remove gender and grammatical
> > cases. I thought that
> > English was perhaps the least gender-oriented and
> > case-oriented language in the
> > indo-european language family. What more needs to
> > be done, and why? For
> > instance, as far as cases go, we have singular,
> > plural, and possessive cases.
> > How would you remove them? Our use of gender is
> > much simpler than in most
> > languages. We use neuter for almost everything,
> > except where the real gender of
> > the object referred to is known, such as a person or
> > animal. Why is this too
> > complicated, and how is it proposed to change it?
> >
>
> I was thinking back to a proposal I read to add an
> additional pronoun "e" to represent a person without
> resepect to gender, (I forgot the objective case). As
> it is in English, especially legal documents, there is
> a tendency to complicate documents because English
> lacks the gender-neutral pronoun: "he/she started
> his/her letter with 'Dear Mr./Ms.'", or the formal,
> "one started ones letter with 'Dear Reader'". That's
> just one. Some people have suggested getting rid of
> agreement of plurals, ("he says", "I say"), and
> irregular verb conjugation. I've travelled around
> Asia quite a bit and have taught English as a second
> language. I've heard the statement that English is
> supposed to be the "global language of business", but
> it is interesting to see how English develops out
> there, and is even somewhat standardized.
>
> Anyway, this is the Shavian group, so I'll resign
> myself to finding solutions to the problems with the
> realm of Shavian. I'm only "disenchanted" about it
> ever becoming more than a hobby unless the entire
> world is taken over by an English-speaking
> dictatorship.
>
> > --
> > Ethan


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/sOykFB/k9VGAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

Alphabets are quite simple compared to Languages, religios and
cultures. They have immediate benefits to eeven the most novice
Englissh speaker who wishes to communicate thru words. For example
on the Internet.
But you do identify the biggest problem of dessemination.
The people who would be most happy to make use of Shavian are hardly
likely to be literate in English. How do you pass this message on to
people who are illiterate or at best are literate in another
languaage and possibly another alphabet, altogether.
That is the Qquestion.

Regards, Paul V.

__________________________________attached__________________


--- In shavian@..., "" <sidban2@e...> wrote:
> The biggest problem with reforming religions, languages,
cultures, etc., is that there has to be a crying need for it by a
large number of people who feel the pain of keeping things the way
they are. How many people feel the pain of a lack of a phonetic
English alphabet? And, surely a universal language such as
Esperanto could not make it even with all of its linguists and
comprehensive dictionaries. The question of the hour is not how to
create a phonetic alphabet but rather how to interest a larger
population of English speakers in the crucial need for it.--- On Sun
07/20, Ethan < ethanl@3... > wrote:
> From: Ethan [mailto: ethanl@3...]To: shavian@y...: Sun, 20 Jul
2003 02:34:50 -0400Subject: Re: [shavian] Disenchanted?07/20/03
1:25:30 AM, Scott Stephens wrote:>There are hundreds of
alternatives besides TO and>Shavian. I've done a lot of research
lately while>tinkering with a Shavian automated translation
engine.> There are ITA, Spanglish, Fonetik, and many
others>that use roman alphabets. The point made by the>request
for an alphabet like Shavian was that reading>text written
phonetically looked unintelligent or>heavily accented compared to
TO, (to someone used to>reading TO, of course -- I don't think it
would look>this way to someone who grew up reading it). It
looks>cool, so I like learning to read it and it would
be>interesting in a game, too.Thanks for clarifying. I have
looked at a number of these "reformed spelling" systems, and my big
gripe about them all is something like this:They almost all use some
system
> of digraphs to replace the missing letters. A few use
diacritics. English has many more sounds than there are letters in
the Roman alphabet, so to substitute for extra letters, these
writing systems use multiple letters. Often they are used in strange
combinations, which have to be memorized. Some of the systems have
more than one way to spell a sound, and/or more than one sound per
spelling. For the most part, they look really bad, if you ask me!
They seem overly simplistic a solution. They do look uneducated,
because they are using the same letters as TO, but in wierd ways. As
far as I know, they all (except perhaps some of the diacritic based
systems) increase the length of many words, making writing more
difficult and tiresome. This increase of word length through the use
of so many digraphs makes reading harder, too.>>"Global
English" refers to a group of people who are>trying to
standardize spoken English. It is the>intermediate between our
current spoken
> language,>(with 600,000 word vocabulary and a lot of
divergent>grammar systems, ("boot"->"boots","foot"-
>"feets"). >It can mean different things to different people.
>English grows by about 3,000 words a year and just>about as
many or more words fall out of usage. Some>people are worried
about regional differences in>spoken English, ("I mended my motor
with a spanner>under the bonnet next to the motorway" vs. "I
fixed my>engine with a wrench under the hood next to
the>highway"). I've been interested in some movements
to>remove gender and certain gramatical cases from the>English
language. Someone from 100 years ago in the>past would find much
of our English dialect strange,>so I was suggesting that a
society of the future would>have many variations from present
English."Global English" sounds to me like the English equivalent to
the French DGLF, «Délégation générale à la langue française», the
organization which standardizes
> the French language. Thanks for explaining it. I don't know that
I could get enthusiastic about reformed roman spelling or
International English, but it is an interesting study, nonetheless.
Still, for now, I think I'll stick with Shavian, the only completely
non-roman English alphabet I know of. Why should English be forced
to conform to a roman alphabet?You mention efforts to remove gender
and grammatical cases. I thought that English was perhaps the least
gender-oriented and case-oriented language in the indo-european
language family. What more needs to be done, and why? For instance,
as far as cases go, we have singular, plural, and possessive cases.
How would you remove them? Our use of gender is much simpler than in
most languages. We use neuter for almost everything, except where
the real gender of the object referred to is known, such as a person
or animal. Why is this too complicated, and how is it proposed to
change it?--Ethan------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
> Sponsor ---------------------~-->Get a FREE REFINANCE QUOTE -
click here!http://us.click.yahoo.com/nHYuCC/ca0FAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM--
-------------------------------------------------------------------~-
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Express Yourself - Share Your Mood in Emails!
> Visit www.SmileyCentral.com - the happiest place on the Web.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/sOykFB/k9VGAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

There are many words in English which should properly
have accents on them, but the accents serve no purpose
and are routinely removed. Compare "résumé",
"résume", and "resume". All 3 are considered correct,
alternate spellings. Only the last one could mean
something completely different, (to begin again), than
the first two depending on context. How about café
vs. cafe? The English-only speaker looks at accents
as being different, but since they aren't understood,
they are usually just ignored. Someone who has some
exposure to other European languages sees the accents
and can easily apply a rule to the vowel.

When someone with the surname "Müller" comes to the
USA, they have to get used to writing "Mueller"
everywhere because government policy, (based on manual
typewriters and printers which are nearly extinct),
insists on the change. Why the waste of characters
and the alienation of non-English, roman alphabet,
languages? Especially since "ue" and "ü" don't sound
the same.

I've seen a lot people using SMS on cell phones play
around with accented characters to make their text
look "cute".

So, I was suggesting that there could be an
alternative spelling system that has exactly one
letter-to-sound for English and could be farily
legible to someone who could read roman alphabet. IPA
is one such alphabet, (and is easily readable to many
ESL students already), but the Latin-1/ISO-8559-1
character set doesn't cover all the letters, so some
by picking and choosing Latin-1 alternatives to IPA
fonts, you could come up with a writing system that is
purely phonetic and doesn't use digraphs at all. Here
is an example off the top of my head:

Á fúlz brán díjests filäsófé intú fälé, síens intú
súperstißun, ænd ärt intú pedantrí. Hens Üniversití
edükaßun.

- Jorj Bernärd §ä

Okay, the system wouldn't cover "sh" or "ch" for now,
(or "ng"), but I just made this up off the top of my
head. There is are letters for "sh" and "ch" in
Latvian, and they are part of the Windows character
set, but they are in ISO-8859-2, not 1. In Unicode,
they are at on the first page, but so is IPA.

--- paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink@...> wrote:
> Hi Ethan & Scott
>
> You have some interesting ideas here.
> Let me suggest another point of view from the
> practical side
> While I can easily conceive of an alternate way of
> spelling English
> phonetically using an extended Roman Alphabet,
> similar to the
> Icelandic Alphabet, there would be a number of
> praactical
> difficulties which would prevent it from being
> widely used. Even if
> it was quite logical and consistent and used a
> minimum of additional
> symbols.
> For example, It would use only use diagraphs for the
> 4 common
> Dipthongs in English.
> The problem is that first you have created an
> alternate set of
> spellings for the most of the English words but not
> necessarily all.
> It is hard enough now to distinguish the meanings
> of Homonyms in
> T.O. It would be confusing for most people to
> decipher, and even
> worse you would quite often have written words with
> 2 valid readings
> based on whether the word was interpreted
> traditionally or with the
> new phonetic system. Since most people learn to
> spell through
> Recognition memory rather than phonetically spelling
> out the sound
> of the word, mistakes are inevitable and likely to
> be propagated
> thru most of the casual, non-computer assisted
> writing.
>
> There is just no easy way to sort out the 2 spelling
> systems, if
> they use more or less the same symbols. Context
> ssensitive methods
> would break down.
>
> Regards, Paul V.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy No Snore & Get a Good Night's Sleep. Natural Oral Spray -- $24.95
(1 bottle, 1 month supply, with sweet almond oil, eucalyptus oil & more).
http://www.challengerone.com/t/l.asp?cid=2881&lp=h515.html
http://us.click.yahoo.com/2oMABA/nuYGAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

There are many words in English which should properly
have accents on them, but the accents serve no purpose
and are routinely removed. Compare "risumi",
"risume", and "resume". All 3 are considered correct,
alternate spellings. Only the last one could mean
something completely different, (to begin again), than
the first two depending on context. How about cafi
vs. cafe? The English-only speaker looks at accents
as being different, but since they aren't understood,
they are usually just ignored. Someone who has some
exposure to other European languages sees the accents
and can easily apply a rule to the vowel.

When someone with the surname "M|ller" comes to the
USA, they have to get used to writing "Mueller"
everywhere because government policy, (based on manual
typewriters and printers which are nearly extinct),
insists on the change. Why the waste of characters
and the alienation of non-English, roman alphabet,
languages? Especially since "ue" and "|" don't sound
the same.

I've seen a lot people using SMS on cell phones play
around with accented characters to make their text
look "cute".

So, I was suggesting that there could be an
alternative spelling system that has exactly one
letter-to-sound for English and could be farily
legible to someone who could read roman alphabet. IPA
is one such alphabet, (and is easily readable to many
ESL students already), but the Latin-1/ISO-8559-1
character set doesn't cover all the letters, so some
by picking and choosing Latin-1 alternatives to IPA
fonts, you could come up with a writing system that is
purely phonetic and doesn't use digraphs at all. Here
is an example off the top of my head:

A fzlz bran dmjests fildssfi intz fdli, smens intz
szpersti_un, fnd drt intz pedantrm. Hens \niversitm
ed|ka_un.

- Jorj Berndrd 'd

Okay, the system wouldn't cover "sh" or "ch" for now,
(or "ng"), but I just made this up off the top of my
head. There is are letters for "sh" and "ch" in
Latvian, and they are part of the Windows character
set, but they are in ISO-8859-2, not 1. In Unicode,
they are at on the first page, but so is IPA.

--- paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink@...> wrote:
> Hi Ethan & Scott
>
> You have some interesting ideas here.
> Let me suggest another point of view from the
> practical side
> While I can easily conceive of an alternate way of
> spelling English
> phonetically using an extended Roman Alphabet,
> similar to the
> Icelandic Alphabet, there would be a number of
> praactical
> difficulties which would prevent it from being
> widely used. Even if
> it was quite logical and consistent and used a
> minimum of additional
> symbols.
> For example, It would use only use diagraphs for the
> 4 common
> Dipthongs in English.
> The problem is that first you have created an
> alternate set of
> spellings for the most of the English words but not
> necessarily all.
> It is hard enough now to distinguish the meanings
> of Homonyms in
> T.O. It would be confusing for most people to
> decipher, and even
> worse you would quite often have written words with
> 2 valid readings
> based on whether the word was interpreted
> traditionally or with the
> new phonetic system. Since most people learn to
> spell through
> Recognition memory rather than phonetically spelling
> out the sound
> of the word, mistakes are inevitable and likely to
> be propagated
> thru most of the casual, non-computer assisted
> writing.
>
> There is just no easy way to sort out the 2 spelling
> systems, if
> they use more or less the same symbols. Context
> ssensitive methods
> would break down.
>
> Regards, Paul V.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy No Snore & Get a Good Night's Sleep. Natural Oral Spray -- $24.95
(1 bottle, 1 month supply, with sweet almond oil, eucalyptus oil & more).
http://www.challengerone.com/t/l.asp?cid=2881&lp=h515.html
http://us.click.yahoo.com/2oMABA/nuYGAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

> and are routinely removed. Compare "résumé",
> "résume", and "resume". All 3 are considered correct,

I know I got a D in french, but shouldn't the first accented e in the
first word be and accent grave, and the accent in the second word be
over the final e? I could be wrong, but it's a minor thing, so... carry
on

Your Spelling Gremlin
--Star

PS, in shaw, there wouldn't be a spelling demon... :)

=====
Hand Jive (do each movement twice): Pat Legs, Clap hands, Wave right over left, Wave left over right, Right fist over left, Left Fist over right, Hitchhiker right, Hitchhiker left.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Free shipping on all inkjet cartridge & refill kit orders to US & Canada. Low prices up to 80% off. We have your brand: HP, Epson, Lexmark & more.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5510
http://us.click.yahoo.com/GHXcIA/n.WGAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

> and are routinely removed. Compare "risumi",
> "risume", and "resume". All 3 are considered correct,

I know I got a D in french, but shouldn't the first accented e in the
first word be and accent grave, and the accent in the second word be
over the final e? I could be wrong, but it's a minor thing, so... carry
on

Your Spelling Gremlin
--Star

PS, in shaw, there wouldn't be a spelling demon... :)

=====
Hand Jive (do each movement twice): Pat Legs, Clap hands, Wave right over left, Wave left over right, Right fist over left, Left Fist over right, Hitchhiker right, Hitchhiker left.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Free shipping on all inkjet cartridge & refill kit orders to US & Canada. Low prices up to 80% off. We have your brand: HP, Epson, Lexmark & more.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5510
http://us.click.yahoo.com/GHXcIA/n.WGAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

--- Scott Stephens <swstephe@...> wrote:
> So, I was suggesting that there could be an
> alternative spelling system that has exactly one
> letter-to-sound for English and could be farily
> legible to someone who could read roman alphabet.
> IPA
> is one such alphabet, (and is easily readable to
> many
> ESL students already), but the Latin-1/ISO-8559-1
> character set doesn't cover all the letters, so some
> by picking and choosing Latin-1 alternatives to IPA
> fonts, you could come up with a writing system that
> is
> purely phonetic and doesn't use digraphs at all.
> Here
> is an example off the top of my head:
>
> Á fúlz brán díjests filäsófé intú fälé, síens intú
> súperstißun, ænd ärt intú pedantrí. Hens Üniversití
> edükaßun.
>
> - Jorj Bernärd §ä
>
> Okay, the system wouldn't cover "sh" or "ch" for
> now,
> (or "ng"), but I just made this up off the top of my
> head. There is are letters for "sh" and "ch" in
> Latvian, and they are part of the Windows character
> set, but they are in ISO-8859-2, not 1. In Unicode,
> they are at on the first page, but so is IPA.

You have another problem, Scott: The MacRoman
character set doesn't have the Icelandic letters thorn
and edh, which are found in Latin-1. The only Mac
fonts that contain thorn and edh are those converted
from Windows TrueType to Mac TrueType.

Some of us are using older computer operating systems
that don't fully support Unicode. I'm still using Mac
OS 9.1, and the only Unicode-friendly browser I've
used is Opera. Unfortunately, unlike other browsers,
Opera has to be purchased after a trial period.

This discussion properly belongs in the saundspel
Yahoo! Group.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/sOykFB/k9VGAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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

--- Scott Stephens <swstephe@...> wrote:
> So, I was suggesting that there could be an
> alternative spelling system that has exactly one
> letter-to-sound for English and could be farily
> legible to someone who could read roman alphabet.
> IPA
> is one such alphabet, (and is easily readable to
> many
> ESL students already), but the Latin-1/ISO-8559-1
> character set doesn't cover all the letters, so some
> by picking and choosing Latin-1 alternatives to IPA
> fonts, you could come up with a writing system that
> is
> purely phonetic and doesn't use digraphs at all.
> Here
> is an example off the top of my head:
>
> A fzlz bran dmjests fildssfi intz fdli, smens intz
> szpersti_un, fnd drt intz pedantrm. Hens \niversitm
> ed|ka_un.
>
> - Jorj Berndrd 'd
>
> Okay, the system wouldn't cover "sh" or "ch" for
> now,
> (or "ng"), but I just made this up off the top of my
> head. There is are letters for "sh" and "ch" in
> Latvian, and they are part of the Windows character
> set, but they are in ISO-8859-2, not 1. In Unicode,
> they are at on the first page, but so is IPA.

You have another problem, Scott: The MacRoman
character set doesn't have the Icelandic letters thorn
and edh, which are found in Latin-1. The only Mac
fonts that contain thorn and edh are those converted
from Windows TrueType to Mac TrueType.

Some of us are using older computer operating systems
that don't fully support Unicode. I'm still using Mac
OS 9.1, and the only Unicode-friendly browser I've
used is Opera. Unfortunately, unlike other browsers,
Opera has to be purchased after a trial period.

This discussion properly belongs in the saundspel
Yahoo! Group.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/sOykFB/k9VGAA/ySSFAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->



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