Shavian eGroup Archive Browser

From: Joe
Date: 2004-04-06 00:36:30 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Number of American speakers vs. British Speakers

Toggle Shavian
--- In shavian@..., "thousandshipz" <thousandshipz@y...> wrote:
> I like your arguments Hugh, but I think that the best way to make
> Shavian internationally viable is to attach the letters to consistent
> phonemes. The closer it is to speech, the more level it is,
> culturally. Locking spelling into one dialect is bound to put the
> majority of English-speakers at a disadvantage to a minority.
> Americans and Brits may have some difficulty understanding each other
> in conversation, but sound changes are quickly comprehended.

Inevitably, some compromise will have to be made. But to attempt a single
standard put Shavian in a direction to becoming just as bad as T.O. Our traditional
spellings are fairly standard, with little variation between dialects, and that can be
seen as a good thing. It has its problems though. While everybody's spelling is
relatively similar, it will never cover all dialects. So, instead, we've settled for a
standard that doesn't accurately represent any.

I don't think either situation is really any better than the other. The best we can
do is agree on a standard to use among those of us in this group and work forward
from there.

> As for creating consistency, I think we need to stop looking at
> spelling as something that should be consistent. Languages undergo
> sound changes regularly and the alphabet should follow the language,
> instead of trailing behind some five centuries or more like our
> present (wretchedly inconsistent!) orthography.

I agree. The only way to avoid that is just to spell phonetically. We should base
our spelling on standard phonetics, of course, rather than trying to invent a new one.
And as the phonetics change, so will the standards, which will remain the basis of our
spelling.



------------------------ 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/

From: carl easton
Date: 2004-04-06 01:53:06 #
Subject: Re: [shavian] Excuse our Quantification of Number of American speakers vs. British Speakers

Toggle Shavian
Hi Paul and Folks,

I sorry for my democratic ways. Trouble is I admire the Shavian Alphabet and want to see it in common use. Plus, I also have the talent of understanding most if not all accents and dialects. Due to my Universal Understanding of all spoken English I was shocked by the need to select a common accent and dialect for Shavian spelling. However, I will politely allow Shaw Enthusiasts to do with Shavian as their Conscience dictates.

best of regards,

Carl

Paul Vandenbrink <pvandenbrink@...> wrote:

Hi Joseph

I think Carl in his enthusiasm to spread the word on the benefits the Shaw
Alphabet has jumped in with a naive attempt to correct the Achilles Heel of
the Shavian Alphabet.
The problem with Shaw as an Alphabet for English, is that first, English is
nowadays becoming the pre-eminent World language. But Secondly, that
English is spoken very differently, sometimes so differently that it is not
understandable.
I can correspond exactly with a Newfoundlander or Cockney, but still be at
a total loss over the phone.
Carl, like most American's, has a tendency to want to go with the majority.
If you have to make a decision, why not make the most people happy.

Fortunately, like yourself, I believe there is a better solution to this
problem.
Why not make computers do all the work, eh.
I am not sure what that solution will be, but I agree with you that you
will not convince the majority of the world to use a Phonetic Alphabet
according to some other countries standard of pronunciation. Just not a go.

Still I think there is place in Shavian for dictionaries and a strategy of
writing English words in Shaw that minimizes variation. At least enough so
that the computers can get a handle on it anyway, eh.

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. We used to have a situation in Quebec where the English business
community required French speaker's to speak English if they wanted a job.
Canada is still suffering over that one.


> You are Right. I responded to Ethan on this. I agree that there
should be a standard of spelling for each English-speaking Nation.
>

At 09:14 AM 4/5/04, you wrote:
>Hello
>
>Do you not think this argument is spurious? How far can one go in
>totting up numbers and dividing them into "national dialects"? Will
>it ever produce anything either usable or desirable?
>
>First you ignore that in most countries there is no standard over all
>the population, and that so-called "national dictionaries" cover only
>a blessed and chosen few. The rest of us must make do with the
>dubious title "non-standard".
>
>If you divide people into nations and then proclaim upon each a
>national spelling for shavian then I dare say that many will tell you
>to sit on it.
>
>Next we must understand that shavian is meant to facilitate
>communication in English and manifold spellings will not do this. At
>the moment there is very little difference between English spelling.
>To have any success we need to make sure that gap shrinks and not
>grow.
>
>An acceptable spelling for all English speakers must be found, with
>differences _only_ where there is a real phonemic difference in
>pronunciation. Also it must be made clear to a learner who comes
>across an unfamiliar word (that is, spelt how they would not say it)
>that all English speakers have made a few concessions to reach a
>standard. Otherwise, like above, people will think you are trying to
>make them speak British/American/Australian/Indian and tell you to go
>play in the road.
>
>I hate to sound like I'm coining a bloody motto, but here is the crux
>of my point: without unity there is no point, and without concession
>there can be no agreement.
>
>Thanks for listening
>Joseph





________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=23609/*http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/static/index2.html> - Enter today

________________________________

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/> .

From: tithhmi
Date: 2004-04-06 03:51:19 #
Subject: [shavian] standardization

Toggle Shavian
is there a standard spelling scheme for either shavian or quikscript
(or the new abjad)or anything tending thereto?





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/

From: Hugh Birkenhead
Date: 2004-04-06 11:03:24 #
Subject: Re: [shavian] Re: Number of American speakers vs. British Speakers

Toggle Shavian
----- Original Message -----
From: "thousandshipz" <thousandshipz@...>


> I like your arguments Hugh, but I think that the best way to make
> Shavian internationally viable is to attach the letters to consistent
> phonemes. The closer it is to speech, the more level it is,
> culturally. Locking spelling into one dialect is bound to put the
> majority of English-speakers at a disadvantage to a minority.
> Americans and Brits may have some difficulty understanding each other
> in conversation, but sound changes are quickly comprehended.

Attached to consistent phonemes? Isn't that what Shavian already is? This
allows speakers to have a different sound for a certain phoneme, as long as
it is consistent through all words that use it - e.g. Brits say the 'ash'
sound quite differently from how Americans say it - but it is a consistent
change across all words, so the same letter can be used without either party
realising it is pronounced differently by the other party.

> As for creating consistency, I think we need to stop looking at
> spelling as something that should be consistent. Languages undergo
> sound changes regularly and the alphabet should follow the language,
> instead of trailing behind some five centuries or more like our
> present (wretchedly inconsistent!) orthography.

Yes, this is true. But I don't think that it should happen again. But as
long as the alphabet can adjust to changes that it can represent with its
current set of letters, we should be OK. If people are used to thinking
phonemically when they write, it shouldn't be too difficult to notice that a
spelling is out of kilter with the way everyone in the world speaks it.

> My two cents. Back to lurking for another year,thou

Hugh B




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/

From: Hugh Birkenhead
Date: 2004-04-06 11:07:01 #
Subject: Re: [shavian] Re: Number of American speakers vs. British Speakers

Toggle Shavian
American Heritage Dictionary. Gets my vote too. I've just noticed it even has dual pronunciation guides where a word is pronounced differently by either Americans or Brits - e.g. "semi", "without", "forest", etc. So it surely MUST be the ideal choice.

Hugh B

----- Original Message -----
From: carl easton <mailto:shavintel16@...>
To: shavian@... <mailto:shavian@...>
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 10:23 PM
Subject: Re: [shavian] Re: Number of American speakers vs. British Speakers

Hi Joseph,

Indeed, a common spelling must be attained. I was only speculating when I said "there should be a standard of spelling for each Nation". I'm speculating, again, but hopefully closer to the truth this time. We must find a dictionary pronouncation acceptable to all English-speaking Shavian Users. I vote -- American Heritage Dictionary -- all may vote now. Some points to consider: this dictionary must be widely available and have a pronouncation key compatable with Shavian.

best of regards,

Carl


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12c3hoils/M=290828.4794622.5939935.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/EXP=1081332420/A=1950450/R=0/SIG=124u9bhid/*http://ashnin.com/clk/muryutaitakenattogyo?YH=4794622&yhad=1950450>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=290828.4794622.5939935.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=:HM/A=1950450/rand=523564110>

________________________________

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/> .

From: Hugh Birkenhead
Date: 2004-04-06 11:09:10 #
Subject: Re: [shavian] Re: Number of American speakers vs. British Speakers

Toggle Shavian
----- Original Message -----
From: carl easton <mailto:shavintel16@...>

Some points to consider: this dictionary must be widely available and have a pronouncation key compatable with Shavian.

best of regards,

Carl


www.dictionary.com <http://www.dictionary.com>
The pronunciation key is easily interpreted into Shavian. I'll draw up a conversion chart if it doesn't appear obvious enough.

Hugh B

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=12cqc9j63/M=291630.4786521.5933964.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/EXP=1081332548/A=2072415/R=0/SIG=11thh7ako/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60178432&partid=4786521>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=291630.4786521.5933964.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=:HM/A=2072415/rand=853476164>

________________________________

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/> .

From: Hugh Birkenhead
Date: 2004-04-06 12:42:18 #
Subject: [shavian] Unicode Shavian Keyboard Layout

Toggle Shavian
Right guys and gals. I've got a layout here for XP users. I'm attaching it,
as it isn't very big, so people here can test it. It's called "Shavian
(DeMeyere)", to denote that it uses Ross DeMeyere's original keyboard
layout. Other people wishing to have their keyboard layouts encoded simply
have to change the name in brackets (e.g. "Shavian (StarRaven)" etc).

I'll say more about it later. Right now I'm rushing out any minute but here
should be some instructions good enough to allow you to start using it.

0.5) Make sure you have a font with Shavian characters at the correct
Unicode points installed - e.g. Andagii, from www.alanwood.net/unicode/
(however see "BUT" section below for notes on this)
1) Extract the two files from the archive first a folder
2) Run "ShavianD.exe"
3) Open the XP language bar (right click taskbar, toolbars menu, language
bar)
4) Right click the language bar - click settings
5) Click "Add..."
6) Change "input language" to Swedish or something like that as long as it
isn't a non-latin-alphabet-based language
7) Click 'keyboard layout' option button - from dropdown list select
"Shavian (DeMeyere)" - click OK button and again at the previous window

Now, as long as a font with Shavian characters at the correct Unicode points
is selected, and you have selected "Swedish" (or whatever) from the language
bar, you can type and have Shavian characters appear, providing the
application you're typing into can support Unicode (Notepad can, at least,
as long as the display font is Andagii, but MS Word 2003 I haven't got doing
it yet). The right Alt key (AltGr) will insert a conventional roman
character, as sometimes you need to.

Hope this is enough to get you started. I'll address problems as they arise.
Have a play.

*BUT* a big problem I'm having is this - Andagii, the only Shavian Unicode
font I have currently, has serious problems with spacing. If you enter Shaw
characters and then press space, it jumps forward far too far. There are
other little niggles like that too. Phillip/Ross - can you make a decent
font that doesn't have such niggles based upon one of your existing fonts?

Hugh B


------------------------ 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/

From: Hugh Birkenhead
Date: 2004-04-06 12:53:59 #
Subject: Re: [shavian] Unicode Shavian Keyboard Layout

Toggle Shavian
Whoops...

> 1) Extract the two files from the archive ***INTO ONE FOLDER***

Hugh B



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/

From: Hugh Birkenhead
Date: 2004-04-06 13:19:53 #
Subject: [shavian] XP users - Shaw fonts @ small sizes

Toggle Shavian
Just a quick tip while I remember it:

For those who use XP - you might have noticed that Shaw fonts look a little rough edged below 14pt sizes and often unreadable. I don't know about you but I found this annoying.

The solution is simple:

1) Right click on the desktop and select "Properties"
2) Choose the "appearance" tab and click "Effects..."
3) Under "use the following method to smooth edges of screen fonts", change it from "Standard" to "ClearType"
4) Click OK, and again at the previous window

There you go! Shaw fonts (and every other font on screen) now look smoother at small sizes.

Hugh B


________________________________

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/> .

From: j_brg
Date: 2004-04-06 14:31:42 #
Subject: [shavian] Adobe PDF

Toggle Shavian
Hello

Can everybody read and use Adobe PDFs?

I understand they are supposed to be cros platform, but I want to
make sure before I make any.

Thanks
Joseph




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/