Shavian eGroup Archive Browser

Hi Star

It would be useful to have simple written explanation of the
differences in letter usage for Standard Britsh Shaw and General
American Shaw for new users. I notice many of the same questions
keep coming up.
I can think of about 5 areas where there are predictable
difficulties.
Did you wish to write one up for the groups purusal, or shall I?

I think we need to be clear about the the original Shavian Alphabet
before we consider any revisions.

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. I will be upgrading my website to allow people to try out a
revised Shaw, but it is far from complete at this moment.

______________________________attached________________________


--- In shavian@..., Star Raven <celestraof12worlds@y...>
wrote:
> Yay Carl!
>
> I am yet another of the staunch supporters of the original form
with
> the addition of the /hw/ sound in a form already described. That
is the
> only revision americans need. Unlike the inbred, backwards
rednecks I
> am forced to deal with here in upper east tennessee, most
americans,
> once the problematic differences are explained, could retain some
> understanding of it.
>
> That being said, I am also willing to keep an open mind about it,
or
> try to. Just be certain that in your revisions that the best parts
of
> shavian are not lost.
>
> --Star
>
> --- carl easton <shavintel16@y...> wrote:
> > Hi Paul and Shep,
> >
> > I'm one of those major supporters of the Original Shavian.
Though I
> > also support Quickscript, as the cursive of Shavian. And Paul, I
> > still would like to see your revision of the Shaw Alphabet.
> > But most of all I am an Original Shavian fan and user.
Shavian is
> > an eloquent way of writing English. Sometime next month I will
send
> > an essay to this Group on my usage of Shavian.
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > Carl
>
>
> =====
> The Piscean Warrior:
> Protector of the Innocent
> Defender of the Weak
> Wanderer of the Off
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.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/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

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

Hi Ethan,

I don't know for sure. Did you look at the unicode website. Right now I don't own a computer, thus no fonts. All my experience with Quickscript is with handwriting. I'm not an expert with QS but I do know it's importance to the Shavian World.

best regards,

Carl

Ethan <ethanl@...> wrote:

12/17/03 5:30:45 PM, carl easton <shavintel16@...> wrote:

> Hi Paul and Shep,
>
> I'm one of those major supporters of the Original Shavian. Though I also
> support Quickscript, as the cursive of Shavian. And Paul, I still would
> like to see your revision of the Shaw Alphabet.
> But most of all I am an Original Shavian fan and user. Shavian is an
> eloquent way of writing English. Sometime next month I will send an essay
> to this Group on my usage of Shavian.
>
> thanks,
>
> Carl

Carl, since you mention Quickscript, do you know if there has been any effort to
get an implementation for Quickscript accepted by the Unicode consortium?

Ethan






________________________________

Yahoo! Groups Links


* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@... <mailto:shavian-unsubscribe@...?subject=Unsubscribe>

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


________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing <http://pa.yahoo.com/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=21260/*http://photos.yahoo.com>

________________________________

Yahoo! Groups Links


* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@... <mailto:shavian-unsubscribe@...?subject=Unsubscribe>

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

Paul,

I'm interested in your decisions as to the five main areas. I can think
of the stressed/unstressed vowel sound, the non connected pairs, i.e.
the ha-ha, hung pairing, and the syllabic consonants. I would love for
you to post your ideas on the main problem areas, and I will see what I
can do to write these up. After all, at one time or another, almost all
of us have contributed on each of these.

I'd like to start compiling such and perhaps we can all write a
TO-Shavian manual as we have discussed? I find the reason I don't write
or read fluently is that there is very little for me to read. One can
only read the Constitution so many times, and I'm an American. :) What
we would need are several short stories or passages from PD docs that
slowly move from TO to Shaw via the gradual word substitution we
suggested earlier, and in between, a discussion (also moving in word
substitution) of problem areas, history of Shavian, and/or thoughts,
comments, and essays on shavian from us, the Shavian users. Included in
this would most likely be a section devoted to the differences in
Original shaw and revised editions, including QS.

--Star

--- paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink@...> wrote:
> Hi Star
>
> It would be useful to have simple written explanation of the
> differences in letter usage for Standard Britsh Shaw and General
> American Shaw for new users. I notice many of the same questions
> keep coming up.
> I can think of about 5 areas where there are predictable
> difficulties.
> Did you wish to write one up for the groups purusal, or shall I?
>
> I think we need to be clear about the the original Shavian Alphabet
> before we consider any revisions.
>
> Regards, Paul V.
>
> P.S. I will be upgrading my website to allow people to try out a
> revised Shaw, but it is far from complete at this moment.
>


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.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/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

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

____________________________
_______________ desimal dAta______________
__________________________________


102. miselEni v filosofi:
H Onli trM wizdom konsists v nOiN HAt jM nO noTiN. ---/sokrAtIz

157. AbmOrmal sFkoloJi:
rMl 2: wI yr t TiNk, tYk, siN, Or JOk, Onli abQt wot wI hAv cOzen t
ekspiariens. bekYz HAt iz wEr n hQ Qur ekspiariensez begin.

217. worSip:
mE wI YlwEz bI wiT H sOrs.

355. warfEr:
noTinN iz ever dun in His world until men yr prepErd t kil wun
AnoHer if it iz not dun. ---/bernerd SY

415. grAmar:
rMl 1: dOnt never jMz nO tripul negativz; sO fEt wOnt pelt jM wiH
roten egativz.

519. probabilitIz:
wiT god Yl TiNz yr posibul, but som TiNz remEn les probabul.

629. enJiniriN:
cFld: wot iz a pedestrian?
dAd: Aniwun hM iz nokd dQn bF An YtOmobIl.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
a pedestrian Qt t bI lIgali alQd t tos At lIst wun hAnd grenEd At a
mOtorist everi dE. ---/brendan fransis

700. yrt:
F lFk t TiNk v H rIl world Az a 3-dimenSonal referens lFbrEri for H
imAJinESon. ---/JEmz gurni

801. filosofi v lit.:
Yl v literacur iz a spEs in wic a varFeti v rFtiNz, non v Hem
OriJinal, blend n krAS. --/rOlAnd byrTes

930. Jeneral histori:
H novelist iz H histOrian v H prezent. H histOrian iz H novelist v
H pAst. ---/JorJ dMhAmel

````````````````````````080A. fFld mdr ---/kErolin desimus



















------------------------ 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/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

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

12/18/03 2:12:44 PM, carl easton <shavintel16@...> wrote:

> Hi Ethan,
>
> I don't know for sure. Did you look at the unicode website. Right now I
> don't own a computer, thus no fonts. All my experience with Quickscript is
> with handwriting. I'm not an expert with QS but I do know it's importance
> to the Shavian World.
>
> best regards,
>
> Carl

I'll have to do some checking on that myself when I get time. What I was
thinking was if there were a Unicode implimentation of QuickScript, those of us
who use Shavian all the time could at the very least use the "wh" character in
QS, just by putting it on a convenient key. It would also be good to have the
ability to use QS for effect and what not. The two scripts are basically
compatible, being that they have a nearly 1 to 1 letter correspondence.

What I don't know though is if there are enough QS users to justify it to the
Unicode people. Just how many people use QS?

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/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

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

--- In shavian@..., Star Raven <celestraof12worlds@y...>
wrote:

> I am yet another of the staunch supporters of the original form with
> the addition of the /hw/ sound in a form already described.

> --Star


The point I am trying to make is that the original form of the Shaw
alphabet would have had /h/ among the voiceless consonants
[p, t, k, f, th(in), s, sh(op), ch(op)] where it belongs, look at
your Shaw Alphabet Reading Key, where these letters uniformly
rise above the vowels, and /ng/, whether or not it should be
paired with the aspirate, together with the voiced consonants
(or other nasals), where it belongs, and that somehow, someway,
the keywords hung and ha-ha were transposed in the (as I
understand, rushed) preparation for publication of Androcles. This
was a simple typographical error and as such is easily corrected;
it is not a major alteration, it would only be a return to the
"original" original form.

Is this, a minor flaw, really important? No. Not if the Shaw
alphabet is to be just another Captain Midnight code for the
exchange of secret messages. But if, and I believe you have
expressed such a desire, this alphabet could someday serve
as an alternative to the standard alphabet, then any obvious
error should be remedied in order to make the best case
possible to a wider world — a wider world, after all, composed
of people who most likely are going to view such an undertaking
as a weird waste of time. If for no other reason then to avoid
gratuitous criticism, and anyone who doesn't believe this hasn't
had to fight for something in committee, where the slightest
weakness or inconsistency in one's position will be ruthlessly
exploited.


Plus, you are right to request the addition of /hw/ which, though
some consider it antiquated, is spoken by tens of millions of people,
easily. Shaw used it, George V used it, theatre English uses it, and
by not following his instructions to emulate such speech Kingsley
Read was remiss. It would have made a perfect pair with /w/:
which/witch, whine/wine, what/watt, why/wye, etc. Probably he
just did not hear the distinction, which is often the case when the
sound in question is not part of the listener's mental make-up. Do
you, living where Southern in one of its varieties is spoken hear (or
notice) the differences there in pronunciation? Grice for grass, for
example, once common. Other Americans and especially people from
the Midwest have in my experience particular difficulty in simply not
hearing the full range of Southern speech, or if they do, suppress
it, and perhaps some similar inability could explain Read's
oversight.

with regards,
ds








Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

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

--- In shavian@..., carl easton <shavintel16@y...> wrote:


> Right now I don't own a computer, thus no fonts.

> Carl




dM not despAr. evantcUli V wil get a kompMtD, evriwon duz.
and V nId not spend a lot ov muni. if jOr primari intrests
yr wiH Ha ritan wurd, eni Old kompMtD wil dM, wurd-prosesih
iz Ha mOst bEsik AplikESun ov Yl. lUk for sumHih Vzd on I-bE.
if V get a /mAk Ebal to Vz sistam nFn, HAt iz, won mEd wiHin
Ha lAst fFv jirz or sO, V wil bI Ebal to switc tM a /dvOrAk kIbOrd
wiH a simpal mQs-klik, and if V NAvnt Ylredi mAstDd tuc-tFpih,
Hen, wiH a SYskript font V kUd kambFn He best ov Yl posabal,
wel, avElabal wurldz.

persavir,
dSep




------------------------ 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/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/mx3olB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

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

Hi Shep
I agree with most of what you say. I take exception with your
statement that your changes to ha-ha and huNG would make Shaw closer
to the original intended by the inventor.
I consider that revision. A revision that improves the Shaw
Alphabets internal consistency and makes it easier to remember and
learn. All well and good.
But in getting rid of an inconsistency, you create a different
version of the Shaw alphabet, that is difficult to read by someone
unaware of your reasoning. You have a communication breakdown.
I have suggested more than 10 recommended changes to the Shaw
Alphabet to improve its consistency and I am aware of 5 others over
the years. Take a look at my notes posted 6 months ago.

Let's make a revised version, but leave the Original Shaw Alphabet
alone. It is an essential starting point, as a Rosetta stone for
newcumers to understand a Phonetic Alphabet. We could use IPA, but
the original Shavian is better, even with its failings.
Newcomers need to have a widespread, well published starting point.
The Original Shaw Alphabet is referred to and even presented as an
illustration in Linguistic texts, Encylopedias, even a few ahead of
their time English Textbooks.
We need to respect that.
Doesn't mean we can't create an improved version geared toward
American English Pronunciation.
We have the means. Interested?

Regards, Paul V.
__________________attached________________________________




--- In shavian@..., "dshepx" <dshep@g...> wrote:
> --- In shavian@..., Star Raven
<celestraof12worlds@y...>
> wrote:
>
> > I am yet another of the staunch supporters of the original form
with
> > the addition of the /hw/ sound in a form already described.
>
> > --Star
>
>
> The point I am trying to make is that the original form of the
Shaw
> alphabet would have had /h/ among the voiceless consonants
> [p, t, k, f, th(in), s, sh(op), ch(op)] where it belongs, look at
> your Shaw Alphabet Reading Key, where these letters uniformly
> rise above the vowels, and /ng/, whether or not it should be
> paired with the aspirate, together with the voiced consonants
> (or other nasals), where it belongs, and that somehow, someway,
> the keywords hung and ha-ha were transposed in the (as I
> understand, rushed) preparation for publication of Androcles. This
> was a simple typographical error and as such is easily corrected;
> it is not a major alteration, it would only be a return to the
> "original" original form.
>
> Is this, a minor flaw, really important? No. Not if the Shaw
> alphabet is to be just another Captain Midnight code for the
> exchange of secret messages. But if, and I believe you have
> expressed such a desire, this alphabet could someday serve
> as an alternative to the standard alphabet, then any obvious
> error should be remedied in order to make the best case
> possible to a wider world — a wider world, after all, composed
> of people who most likely are going to view such an undertaking
> as a weird waste of time. If for no other reason then to avoid
> gratuitous criticism, and anyone who doesn't believe this hasn't
> had to fight for something in committee, where the slightest
> weakness or inconsistency in one's position will be ruthlessly
> exploited.
>
>
> Plus, you are right to request the addition of /hw/ which, though
> some consider it antiquated, is spoken by tens of millions of
people,
> easily. Shaw used it, George V used it, theatre English uses it,
and
> by not following his instructions to emulate such speech Kingsley
> Read was remiss. It would have made a perfect pair with /w/:
> which/witch, whine/wine, what/watt, why/wye, etc. Probably he
> just did not hear the distinction, which is often the case when
the
> sound in question is not part of the listener's mental make-up. Do
> you, living where Southern in one of its varieties is spoken hear
(or
> notice) the differences there in pronunciation? Grice for grass,
for
> example, once common. Other Americans and especially people from
> the Midwest have in my experience particular difficulty in simply
not
> hearing the full range of Southern speech, or if they do, suppress
> it, and perhaps some similar inability could explain Read's
> oversight.
>
> with regards,
> ds




Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

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

I would say with near certainty that only the the heaviest accented
groups those that most outsiders can't understand at all, seem to lose
the /hw/ sound, and even there it appears somewhat. Perhaps it was left
out for aesthetic reasons :) ? I mean, after all, it would have no
pairing.

As for Grass/grice, it is not entirely correct. As my husband and I
have learned by living in a rather rural area, the vowel is not so
simple as changing a short a to long I. It's more af a vowel shift. The
short a is flattened and moves to the far back of the throat, then is
followed by a long e or even a long e and a second, shorter a. Another
major difference, perhaps missed by most is the tempo which tends to,
as above, lengthen the vowel sounds.

God I love living in redneck country.
--Star

--- dshepx <dshep@...> wrote:
> --- In shavian@..., Star Raven <celestraof12worlds@y...>
> wrote:
>
> > I am yet another of the staunch supporters of the original form
> with
> > the addition of the /hw/ sound in a form already described.
>
> > --Star
>
>
> The point I am trying to make is that the original form of the Shaw
> alphabet would have had /h/ among the voiceless consonants
> [p, t, k, f, th(in), s, sh(op), ch(op)] where it belongs, look at
> your Shaw Alphabet Reading Key, where these letters uniformly
> rise above the vowels, and /ng/, whether or not it should be
> paired with the aspirate, together with the voiced consonants
> (or other nasals), where it belongs, and that somehow, someway,
> the keywords hung and ha-ha were transposed in the (as I
> understand, rushed) preparation for publication of Androcles. This
> was a simple typographical error and as such is easily corrected;
> it is not a major alteration, it would only be a return to the
> "original" original form.
>
> Is this, a minor flaw, really important? No. Not if the Shaw
> alphabet is to be just another Captain Midnight code for the
> exchange of secret messages. But if, and I believe you have
> expressed such a desire, this alphabet could someday serve
> as an alternative to the standard alphabet, then any obvious
> error should be remedied in order to make the best case
> possible to a wider world — a wider world, after all, composed
> of people who most likely are going to view such an undertaking
> as a weird waste of time. If for no other reason then to avoid
> gratuitous criticism, and anyone who doesn't believe this hasn't
> had to fight for something in committee, where the slightest
> weakness or inconsistency in one's position will be ruthlessly
> exploited.
>
>
> Plus, you are right to request the addition of /hw/ which, though
> some consider it antiquated, is spoken by tens of millions of people,
> easily. Shaw used it, George V used it, theatre English uses it, and
> by not following his instructions to emulate such speech Kingsley
> Read was remiss. It would have made a perfect pair with /w/:
> which/witch, whine/wine, what/watt, why/wye, etc. Probably he
> just did not hear the distinction, which is often the case when the
> sound in question is not part of the listener's mental make-up. Do
> you, living where Southern in one of its varieties is spoken hear (or
> notice) the differences there in pronunciation? Grice for grass, for
> example, once common. Other Americans and especially people from
> the Midwest have in my experience particular difficulty in simply not
>
> hearing the full range of Southern speech, or if they do, suppress
> it, and perhaps some similar inability could explain Read's
> oversight.
>
> with regards,
> ds
>
>
>
>
>
>


=====
Support bacteria. It's the only culture some people have.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/



Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

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

I would say with near certainty that only the the heaviest accented
groups those that most outsiders can't understand at all, seem to lose
the /hw/ sound, and even there it appears somewhat. Perhaps it was left
out for aesthetic reasons :) ? I mean, after all, it would have no
pairing.

As for Grass/grice, it is not entirely correct. As my husband and I
have learned by living in a rather rural area, the vowel is not so
simple as changing a short a to long I. It's more af a vowel shift. The
short a is flattened and moves to the far back of the throat, then is
followed by a long e or even a long e and a second, shorter a. Another
major difference, perhaps missed by most is the tempo which tends to,
as above, lengthen the vowel sounds.

God I love living in redneck country.
--Star

--- dshepx <dshep@...> wrote:
> --- In shavian@..., Star Raven <celestraof12worlds@y...>
> wrote:
>
> > I am yet another of the staunch supporters of the original form
> with
> > the addition of the /hw/ sound in a form already described.
>
> > --Star
>
>
> The point I am trying to make is that the original form of the Shaw
> alphabet would have had /h/ among the voiceless consonants
> [p, t, k, f, th(in), s, sh(op), ch(op)] where it belongs, look at
> your Shaw Alphabet Reading Key, where these letters uniformly
> rise above the vowels, and /ng/, whether or not it should be
> paired with the aspirate, together with the voiced consonants
> (or other nasals), where it belongs, and that somehow, someway,
> the keywords hung and ha-ha were transposed in the (as I
> understand, rushed) preparation for publication of Androcles. This
> was a simple typographical error and as such is easily corrected;
> it is not a major alteration, it would only be a return to the
> "original" original form.
>
> Is this, a minor flaw, really important? No. Not if the Shaw
> alphabet is to be just another Captain Midnight code for the
> exchange of secret messages. But if, and I believe you have
> expressed such a desire, this alphabet could someday serve
> as an alternative to the standard alphabet, then any obvious
> error should be remedied in order to make the best case
> possible to a wider world  a wider world, after all, composed
> of people who most likely are going to view such an undertaking
> as a weird waste of time. If for no other reason then to avoid
> gratuitous criticism, and anyone who doesn't believe this hasn't
> had to fight for something in committee, where the slightest
> weakness or inconsistency in one's position will be ruthlessly
> exploited.
>
>
> Plus, you are right to request the addition of /hw/ which, though
> some consider it antiquated, is spoken by tens of millions of people,
> easily. Shaw used it, George V used it, theatre English uses it, and
> by not following his instructions to emulate such speech Kingsley
> Read was remiss. It would have made a perfect pair with /w/:
> which/witch, whine/wine, what/watt, why/wye, etc. Probably he
> just did not hear the distinction, which is often the case when the
> sound in question is not part of the listener's mental make-up. Do
> you, living where Southern in one of its varieties is spoken hear (or
> notice) the differences there in pronunciation? Grice for grass, for
> example, once common. Other Americans and especially people from
> the Midwest have in my experience particular difficulty in simply not
>
> hearing the full range of Southern speech, or if they do, suppress
> it, and perhaps some similar inability could explain Read's
> oversight.
>
> with regards,
> ds
>
>
>
>
>
>


=====
Support bacteria. It's the only culture some people have.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/



Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shavian/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shavian-unsubscribe@...

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