Shavian eGroup Archive Browser

My sympathy goes out to you with best wishes for a speedy recovery.

In outlook express when composing message click on the "Format" menu item and select "rich text". The composition window will then contain a font selection item that allows you to choose a Shavian font.

--gary

----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel G. Szczurek <mailto:twojbrat@...>
To: shavian@... <mailto:shavian@...>
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2000 3:41 PM
Subject: Re: [shavian] Relaxing phonemicism (Was "eat" and "if")

Hugh,
I have Outlook Express. As soon as I remember how I sent e-mail in Shavian before, I will start doing it again. I had brain surgery 6 weeks ago, and have been having worse seizures than before. Trying to figure out stuff on the computer at this point gives me headaches, and these make seizures most likely. (I have been an epileptic since I was in VietNam as a nurse.) Look for Shavian e-mail soon, when I get this refigured out. I know I can and should do my group mail in the Alphabet.
Thanks! Dan



eGroups Sponsor
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=150967.1016644.2717500.908943/D=egroupmail/S=1700019510:N/A=468535/*http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/N1198.egroups.com/B26105;sz=468x60;ord=975350123?>

--- In shavian@..., "Gary Shannon" <reboot@r...> wrote:
> There have been a lot of suggestions lately for which Shavian
letters to omit, and which to change and what sort of spelling
conventions should be observed and so on. In addition, Quickscript
rules have been introduced and recomended for use with Shavian.
>
> I'd like to propose something considerably less drastic than a
complete revision of the system, which I believe to be unnecessary.
What I'm proposing is a revision of the pronunciation guide to make it
more stable with respect to differing dialects of English. I am
proposing that the vowel sounds originally intended by the designer be
restored, and that better model words be chosen to represent those
sounds to speakers of any dialect.
>
> Rather than the terse "o=on" entry found in the present guide, it
should be explained that the British pronunciation of "on" might more
accurately be represented to an American speaker by the "aw" of
"lawn". As far as I can tell "lawn" is pronounced the same in both
dialects, and because of that I propose that a more correct reading
guide entry would be "o= aw as in lawn", with the caveat that this is
an approximate representation at best.
>
> This would require that Amercian users of Shavian would have to
change some of the ways in which they use "o". I suppose that could be
justified by observing that American users have always misunderstood
the sound of that letter since they pronounce the model word "on"
differently than the originator of the script did.
>
> Similar "correction" could be introduced to the reading guide so
that we would all at least be in agreement as to the general sound of
each vowel. Shavian is not meant to be another IPA designed to
capture evey possible subtle verbal nuance, so the strict phoneticism
has to be relaxed, at least slightly. But I do believe we could reach
some agreement as to the approximate vowel sounds that would be in
closer accord with the designer's original intention.
>
> ==gary


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/4/_/54531/_/975352832/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

http://www.teleport.com/~fiziwig/shaw.html now contains the following
Shavian texts:

Edgar Allen Poe:

--The Fall of the House of Usher
--The Pit and the Pendulum
--The Tell Tale Heart

Edgar Rice Burroughs

--The Land that Time Forgot (novel)
----Chapter One

--gary


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Create your business web site your way now at Bigstep.com.
It's the fast, easy way to get online, to promote your business,
and to sell your products and services. Try Bigstep.com now.
http://click.egroups.com/1/9183/4/_/54531/_/975354932/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

--- In shavian@..., "Jon Zuck" <frimmin@e...> wrote:

> Later tonight, expect a post from me with a detailed proposal for
> standardizing names for the Second Shaw Alphabet (which might even
be
> useful in your consideration for First Shaw names), as well as an
> attempt to clarify what Second Shaw really contains, distinctions
> between letters, ligatures, and alternate forms, etc.

It seems I have joined this group at an historic turning point!

> I think we're at another milestone in Shaw Alphabet history--if we
> think and plan carefully, we might be able to bring Second Shaw
into
a
> better state of affairs than it was when Read died.

As a new user, I think that this would be the right time to do it.

> BTW: Second Shaw sounds derivative and "secondary," and
> Quickscript sounds like a shorthand that would never be worthy
> of print or typefaces. Would it be worth the trouble to
> consider a new name for this alphabet, or should we leave well
> enough alone. Roger, Paige, Jayson, anyone?

Just a thought: How about Shaw - Millenial Edition? :-)
Lux


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/4/_/54531/_/975354587/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Zuck" <frimmin@...>
To: <shavian@...>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 11:04 AM
Subject: [shavian] Re: A Modest Proposal



<snip>
>
> BTW: Second Shaw sounds derivative and "secondary," and
> Quickscript sounds like a shorthand that would never be worthy
> of print or typefaces. Would it be worth the trouble to
> consider a new name for this alphabet, or should we leave well
> enough alone. Roger, Paige, Jayson, anyone?

There's also the problem that "Quickscript" (as a quick web search reveals)
is a name also applied to a computer scripting langauge. That could cause
no end of confusion, not to mention possible legal snarls.

--gary



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Create your business web site your way now at Bigstep.com.
It's the fast, easy way to get online, to promote your business,
and to sell your products and services. Try Bigstep.com now.
http://click.egroups.com/1/9183/4/_/54531/_/975354665/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

----- Original Message -----
From: "Collin, Roger" <roger.collin@...>
To: <shavian@...>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 12:33 PM
Subject: [shavian] Correction to email address



<snip>

> Thanks Jon and Jayson for uploading the Quickscript fonts I look forward
to
> using them. I hope that Gary Shanon can change his translator program to
> use these fonts as well.
>
> Roger Collin
> roJx kolin

Program changed and uploaded at http://www.teleport.com/~fiziwig/xlate.html

--gary



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/4/_/54531/_/975359136/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

Hi,
The Quickscript manual and a massive article both in and on the
Second Shaw Alphabet is available from: collin-@...
<mailto:collin-@...> I found Roger Collin most helpful,
prompt, and the material VERY reasonably priced. $5 US.
Just a correction to my email address that Jon posted. It should be
collinr@... or roger.collin@....
I notice that 51 people subscribe to this egroup. I suppose I am one of the
'silent lurkers' that reads the postings but doesn't really contribute
much. However I do enjoy reading the comments that are posted. I would be
interested in knowing what this group thought about the future of the Shaw
alphabets. Do they have a place in a computerised society where speed and
efficiency of writing are made much easier by computer? I personally don't
think that these alphabets will be adopted by any but a few people despite
their inherent beauty, speed of both reading and writing, and phonetic use
of the alphabet (if children were bought up learning the Shaw alphabet they
could do away with the whole spelling curriculum! - and they learn the Shaw
alphabet quickly, I have taught my two children (6 & 9 yrs) the basics of
Quickscript and they picked it up very easily). Anyhow I would be
interested in other viewpoints.
Thanks Jon and Jayson for uploading the Quickscript fonts I look forward to
using them. I hope that Gary Shanon can change his translator program to
use these fonts as well.

Roger Collin
roJx kolin





-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
Create your business web site your way now at Bigstep.com.
It's the fast, easy way to get online, to promote your business,
and to sell your products and services. Try Bigstep.com now.
http://click.egroups.com/1/9183/4/_/54531/_/975357436/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Shannon <mailto:reboot@...>
To: shavian@... <mailto:shavian@...>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 6:31 PM
Subject: [shavian] A Modest Proposal

There have been a lot of suggestions lately for which Shavian letters to omit, and which to change and what sort of spelling conventions should be observed and so on. In addition, Quickscript rules have been introduced and recomended for use with Shavian.

I’d like to propose something considerably less drastic than a complete revision of the system, which I believe to be unnecessary. What I’m proposing is a revision of the pronunciation guide to make it more stable with respect to differing dialects of English. I am proposing that the vowel sounds originally intended by the designer be restored, and that better model words be chosen to represent those sounds to speakers of any dialect.

I don't think the 'pronunciation guide' is a problem at all, because it really plays a small part in the learning of the alphabet. It gives a basic idea of how the letter sounds, that's all. I found that reading texts already written in Shavian were a FAR better tutor than the letter names themselves, because you can see where one letter can be written in preference to another. You can't just learn the alphabet from the table, you have to read at least SOME material to understand the letters - my 'material' was Androcles (as it was the only material there was).

Rather than the terse “o=on” entry found in the present guide, it should be explained that the British pronunciation of “on” might more accurately be represented to an American speaker by the “aw” of “lawn”. As far as I can tell “lawn” is pronounced the same in both dialects, and because of that I propose that a more correct reading guide entry would be “o= aw as in lawn”, with the caveat that this is an approximate representation at best.

I'm afraid that the 'aw' from 'lawn' is not at all pronounced the same in both dialects. :( To me, the letter 'on' is more like a short 'ah' sound, with the mouth a little more rounded. I doubt there is one word that you could specify that would contain this sound in both dialects. In fact the best approach should not be to select a sound that sounds the same in both, but to select a sound that is consistently used in the same circumstances in both dialects.

This would require that Amercian users of Shavian would have to change some of the ways in which they use “o”. I suppose that could be justified by observing that American users have always misunderstood the sound of that letter since they pronounce the model word “on” differently than the originator of the script did.

How do you pronounce the 'o' in hot? That's how it should sound. Just like the letter 'oh' should be pronounced just how you would say 'oh', for instance.

Similar “correction” could be introduced to the reading guide so that we would all at least be in agreement as to the general sound of each vowel. Shavian is not meant to be another IPA designed to capture evey possible subtle verbal nuance, so the strict phoneticism has to be relaxed, at least slightly. But I do believe we could reach some agreement as to the approximate vowel sounds that would be in closer accord with the designer’s original intention.

I don't believe Shavian characters seek to prescribe exact phonetics. You have to say the Shavian letternames as you would say them. Ask Dennis Falk to comment on this one - he does a much better job than me.

==gary

Hugh

Roger,
What URL do I go to in order to download a font for the "Second Shaw
Alphabet?" I have an iMac, and I'd at least like to see what this second
alphabet is all about. If I can get a font, I can try it out.
I have used the Shaw Alphabet for work with children and adults who have
problems in reading. Even at this point, it is helpful for them not to spend
all of their time learning to read and write. They get discouraged with
reading and never get to read anything they want to read, which is why they
wanted to learn to read in the first place! I transition them from the Shaw
Alphabet to normal chaotic English spelling. By the time they get to
"normal" spelling, their motivation to read is at least intact. This helps
them when they face the formidable task of reading English, as it is now
spelled. Most adult reading programs, advertising notwithstanding, leave the
learners awfully discouraged.
Daniel Szczurek

----------
>From: "Collin, Roger" <roger.collin@...>
>To: "'shavian@...'" <shavian@...>
>Subject: [shavian] Correction to email address
>Date: Nov Mon, 2000, 12:33
>

> Hi,
> The Quickscript manual and a massive article both in and on the
> Second Shaw Alphabet is available from: collin-@...
> <mailto:collin-@...> I found Roger Collin most helpful,
> prompt, and the material VERY reasonably priced. $5 US.
> Just a correction to my email address that Jon posted. It should be
> collinr@... or roger.collin@....
> I notice that 51 people subscribe to this egroup. I suppose I am one of the
> 'silent lurkers' that reads the postings but doesn't really contribute
> much. However I do enjoy reading the comments that are posted. I would be
> interested in knowing what this group thought about the future of the Shaw
> alphabets. Do they have a place in a computerised society where speed and
> efficiency of writing are made much easier by computer? I personally don't
> think that these alphabets will be adopted by any but a few people despite
> their inherent beauty, speed of both reading and writing, and phonetic use
> of the alphabet (if children were bought up learning the Shaw alphabet they
> could do away with the whole spelling curriculum! - and they learn the Shaw
> alphabet quickly, I have taught my two children (6 & 9 yrs) the basics of
> Quickscript and they picked it up very easily). Anyhow I would be
> interested in other viewpoints.
> Thanks Jon and Jayson for uploading the Quickscript fonts I look forward to
> using them. I hope that Gary Shanon can change his translator program to
> use these fonts as well.
>
> Roger Collin
> roJx kolin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/4/_/54531/_/975369336/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

----- Original Message -----
From: Hugh Birkenhead <mailto:mixsynth@...>
To: shavian@... <mailto:shavian@...>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: [shavian] A Modest Proposal


----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Shannon <mailto:reboot@...>
To: shavian@... <mailto:shavian@...>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 6:31 PM
Subject: [shavian] A Modest Proposal

There have been a lot of suggestions lately for which Shavian letters to omit, and which to change and what sort of spelling conventions should be observed and so on. In addition, Quickscript rules have been introduced and recomended for use with Shavian.

I’d like to propose something considerably less drastic than a complete revision of the system, which I believe to be unnecessary. What I’m proposing is a revision of the pronunciation guide to make it more stable with respect to differing dialects of English. I am proposing that the vowel sounds originally intended by the designer be restored, and that better model words be chosen to represent those sounds to speakers of any dialect.

I don't think the 'pronunciation guide' is a problem at all, because it really plays a small part in the learning of the alphabet. It gives a basic idea of how the letter sounds, that's all. I found that reading texts already written in Shavian were a FAR better tutor than the letter names themselves, because you can see where one letter can be written in preference to another. You can't just learn the alphabet from the table, you have to read at least SOME material to understand the letters - my 'material' was Androcles (as it was the only material there was).

Rather than the terse “o=on” entry found in the present guide, it should be explained that the British pronunciation of “on” might more accurately be represented to an American speaker by the “aw” of “lawn”. As far as I can tell “lawn” is pronounced the same in both dialects, and because of that I propose that a more correct reading guide entry would be “o= aw as in lawn”, with the caveat that this is an approximate representation at best.

I'm afraid that the 'aw' from 'lawn' is not at all pronounced the same in both dialects. :( To me, the letter 'on' is more like a short 'ah' sound, with the mouth a little more rounded. I doubt there is one word that you could specify that would contain this sound in both dialects. In fact the best approach should not be to select a sound that sounds the same in both, but to select a sound that is consistently used in the same circumstances in both dialects.

This would require that Amercian users of Shavian would have to change some of the ways in which they use “o”. I suppose that could be justified by observing that American users have always misunderstood the sound of that letter since they pronounce the model word “on” differently than the originator of the script did.

How do you pronounce the 'o' in hot? That's how it should sound. Just like the letter 'oh' should be pronounced just how you would say 'oh', for instance.

Similar “correction” could be introduced to the reading guide so that we would all at least be in agreement as to the general sound of each vowel. Shavian is not meant to be another IPA designed to capture evey possible subtle verbal nuance, so the strict phoneticism has to be relaxed, at least slightly. But I do believe we could reach some agreement as to the approximate vowel sounds that would be in closer accord with the designer’s original intention.

I don't believe Shavian characters seek to prescribe exact phonetics. You have to say the Shavian letternames as you would say them. Ask Dennis Falk to comment on this one - he does a much better job than me.

==gary

Hugh

The problem as I see it is that you and I don't pronounce "on" the same way. That being the case how do we convey, in print, just what sound "on" is supposed to be? And if the sound that the letter stands for is different in different dialects then the alphabet isn't at all phonetic, since the letterform baers no relationship to the sound. Same letterform, two very different sounds depending on dialect. That's the problem with the reading guide.

I think if we each made an audio recording of what we believe each vowel sound to be we would find that we are not at all in agreement about some of the vowels, and I think THAT is the source of all, or at least most of the controversy about which letter to use in a given spelling.

I'm only trying to reach some sort of agreement, internationally so to speak, about what sound "on" is so we know where it is appropriate to use that letter in our writing. There are those who have posted in this group that the Shavian "awe" is superfluous because that sound is already covered by "on". Clearly we are not in agreement as to what "on" sounds like. If we can clear up these issues then most of the controversy goes away.

--gary



eGroups Sponsor
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=150967.1016644.2717500.908943/D=egroupmail/S=1700019510:N/A=468535/*http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/N1198.egroups.com/B26105;sz=468x60;ord=975373114?>