Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

Actually, I think it better to stick with the 'new names' given in the
order, or the original.  I like the alpha¾ta -aleph-bet style names,
and it dispenses with the neccesity of such language codes as 'alpha
charlie beta tango' to keep from mixing letter names up.

attached



Star Raven wrote:

> P.S. It is too early to stand against the new names. It was just a

> starting point and incomplete to boot.

> You will just have to wait.

> Restrain yourself, girl. You will get your chance.



PPPPBBBLLLLLTTTTT!



Now that's over, we can get on to the business. I agree that yes, the

original names could use some tweaking, but I don't think we should go

so far as to re-do the whole thing. Perhaps, like in English we

consider names like our English letters.



A-ee

Bee

See

Dee

Ee

Ef

Gee

and so on, but reworked for our letters. Pip bib gig t-- well, you get

the idea.



--Star



==========



http://www.livejournal.com/users/wodentoad



Just because you're evil on the inside, doesn't mean you can't look
pretty on the outside.

--Mother Mae-Eye





           

____________________________________________________

Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

What about the 'r's?  Or should I try to figure that one out?



___________________________attached________________________________________



paul vandenbrink wrote:

Hi Everyone

I will show the correspondences with Roman Alphabet Order.



A  > 1. Adoo    (ado)

A  > 2. Alef    (ash)

A  > 3. Aitch   (Ice) pronounced like Aye with a Ch ending

B  > 4. Bet     (Bib)

G  > 5. Gimel   (Gag)

D  > 6. Delta   (Dead)

H  > 7. Hey     (Ha-ha)

V  > 8. Vav     (Vow)

Z  > 9. Zaiyeen (zoo)

T  > 10. Tawf   (tot) pronounced like Toff-ee

Y  > 11. Yad    (Yea)

Y  > 12. Yood   (Yew)

K  > 13. Kawf   (kick) pronounced like cough

L  > 14. Lamed  (loll)

M  > 15. Mem    (mime)

N  > 16. Nash   (nun)

N  > 17. Ingga  (hung)

S  > 18. Sam    (so)

E  > 19. Ester  (egg)

E  > 20. Eisawv (age) pronounced like A-salve

E  > 21. Eiran  (air) pronounced like Air-an

P  > 22. Pey    (peep) pronounced like pay

ER > 23. Earl   (Array)

ER > 24. Urd    (Urge)

R  > 25. Resh   (Roar)

SH > 26. Shawn  (Sure)

F  > 27. Fee    (fee) 

W  > 28. Wazoo  (woe)

J  > 29. Jawn   (measure) pronounced like the the French "Jean"

CH > 30. Cheetch (church)

J  > 31. Judge   (judge)

TH > 32. Thor    (thigh)

TH > 33. Thawn   (They)

I  > 34. Izrah   (If)

I  > 35. Eesy    (Eat)  pronounced like E.C. 

O  > 36. Oprah   (Oak)

O  > 37. Oivy    (Oil)

U  > 38. Ooze    (ooze)



The only Roman letters equivalents not represented are C, Q and X.

The Order of the letters is quite similar, and more importantly the

lesser used letters have been migrated to the end of the list.

Any suggestions on improving the Shavian sequence of letters.



Regards, Paul V.

_______________________attached___________________________

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink"

wrote:

> Hi Philip

> I'd like to make a Primer too.

> But I was concerned that the order and the Names of the Shaw

> Alphabet might be an unnecessary hurdle for someone familar with

the

> order of the Roman Alphabet.

> I find the fact that the Greek and Hebrew Alphabets are close to

the

> Roman Alphabet in order, to helpful in looking up a word in those

> languages.

> A while back I suggested an Alternate Shavian Alphabet order with

> more distinctive names. Maybe we could use that as a starting

point.

> I think it is also a good idea that the more commonly used letters


> should be at the beginning of the Alphabet.

>

> Here is the new proposed order.

>

> 1. Adoo   (ado)

> 2. Alef   (ash)

> 3. Aitch  (Ice)

> 4. Bet    (Bib)

> 5. Gimel  (Gag)

> 6. Delta  (Dead)

> 7. Hey    (Ha-ha)

> 8. Vav    (Vow)

> 9. Zaiyeen (zoo)

> 10. Tawf   (tot) pronounced like Toff-ee

> 11. Yad    (Yea)

> 12. Yood   (Yew)

> 13. Kawf   (kick) pronounced like cough

> 14. Lamed  (loll)

> 15. Mem    (mime)

> 16. Nash   (nun)

> 17. Ingga  (hung)

> 18. Sam    (so)

> 19. Ester  (egg)

> 20. Eisawv (age) pronounced like A-salve

> 21. Eiran  (air) pronounced like Air-an

> 22. Pey    (peep) pronounced like pay

> 23. Earl   (Array)

> 24. Urd    (Urge)

> 25. Resh   (Roar)

> 26. Shawn  (Sure)

> 27. Fee    (fee) 

> 28. Wazoo  (woe)

> 29. Jawn   (measure) pronounced like the the French "Jean"

> 30. Cheetch (church)

> 31. Judge   (judge)

> 32. Thor    (thigh)

> 33. Thawn   (They)

> 34. Izrah   (If)

> 35. Eesy    (Eat)  pronounced like E.C. 

> 36. Oprah   (Oak)

> 37. Oivy    (Oil)

> 38. Ooze    (ooze)

>

> I haven't figured out a good order for the remaining 10

> Vowel sounds. They are harder to fit into the traditional pattern.

>

> up, on, ah, wool, out, awe

> Ir, Are, Or

> and Ian

>

> Suggestions?

> Regards, Paul V.

>

_______________attached________________________________________    

>

> --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, Philip Newton

> wrote:

> > On 8/10/05, Ph.D. wrote:

> > > Philip Newton skribis:

> > > >

> > > > One resource that's occasionally pointed to is AHD4
(The

> American

> > > > Heritage(r) Dictionary of the English Language,
Fourth

> Edition), which

> > > > you can find at http://dictionary.reference.com/
(among

other

> places);

> > > > it makes more distinctions than General American
(e.g. cot-

> caught, but

> > > > not horse-hoarse or for-four, which Shavian also
does not

> > > > distinguish). Although it seems to use "ash" for

> > > > pass/faster/master/grass/ask/answer, which
surprises me.

> > >

> > > Why does this surprise you? General American does make a


> distinction

> > > between cot/caught but not between horse/hoarse or
for/four.

> >

> > I was under the impression that the 'lect underlying AHD4 was


not

> GA

> > but something a bit closer to British pronunciation --

> specifically,

> > something moderately suitable for Androcles-style Shavian.

> >

> > (And I didn't know that GA does not have the cot/caught
merger.)

> >

> > It appears that AHD4 is not *that* great an approximation at

> Androcles

> > Shavian, but it may still be better than the native 'lect for


some

> > people.

> >

> > > General American does have the sound of "ash" in

> > > pass/faster/master/grass/ask/answer.

> >

> > I see.

> > --

> > Philip Newton

On 8/11/05, paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink11@...> wrote:
> A while back I suggested an Alternate Shavian Alphabet order with
> more distinctive names. Maybe we could use that as a starting point.
> I think it is also a good idea that the more commonly used letters
> should be at the beginning of the Alphabet.

In principle, a good idea. But I think that inertia is hard to
overcome -- for example, the order of the letters in the Roman
alphabet is essentially arbitrary, but I doubt that any attempt at
re-ordering them would catch on. (And historically, new letters are
usually added to the end, as the Romans did with Y and Z, for example,
as if they were afraid to disturb the order of letters they
inherited.)

> Here is the new proposed order.
>
> 1. Adoo (ado)
> 2. Alef (ash)
> 3. Aitch (Ice)
> 4. Bet (Bib)
[snip]

> Suggestions?

You wrote that you were "concerned that the [...] Names of the Shaw
Alphabet might be an unnecessary hurdle for someone familar with the
order of the Roman Alphabet." I'm not sure how these names are better,
in this respect, than the existing ones -- they're still fantasy names
which will be unfamiliar with someone who knows only the names of the
letters of the English alphabet.

I'll also give it as my opinion that you're unlikely to gain much
consensus and "buy-in" with your proposed renaming and reordering.
Which needn't mean that your proposal is bad, but if it's not widely
adopted (among the Shaw-alphabet-using community), it will be less
useful than if it were.

Finally, I think that the fact that the Shaw alphabet uses
voiced/voiceless pairs of letters should not be ignored; putting them
in a close correspondence seems more aesthetic to me (either p-t-k ...
b-d-g or p-b-t-d-k-g). But that's my opinion, influenced by the order
on the Reading Key and by the comments in Tolkien's description of the
tengwar, the letters used to write e.g. Elvish languages, where also
letters with similar sounds were grouped together.
--
Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>

I agree that the names should stay the same as they are now.



Philip Newton wrote:

On 8/11/05, paul vandenbrink wrote:

> A while back I suggested an Alternate Shavian Alphabet order with

> more distinctive names. Maybe we could use that as a starting
point.

> I think it is also a good idea that the more commonly used letters

> should be at the beginning of the Alphabet.



In principle, a good idea. But I think that inertia is hard to

overcome -- for example, the order of the letters in the Roman

alphabet is essentially arbitrary, but I doubt that any attempt at

re-ordering them would catch on. (And historically, new letters are

usually added to the end, as the Romans did with Y and Z, for example,

as if they were afraid to disturb the order of letters they

inherited.)



> Here is the new proposed order.

>

> 1. Adoo   (ado)

> 2. Alef   (ash)

> 3. Aitch  (Ice)

> 4. Bet    (Bib)

[snip]



> Suggestions?



You wrote that you were "concerned that the [...] Names of the Shaw

Alphabet might be an unnecessary hurdle for someone familar with the

order of the Roman Alphabet." I'm not sure how these names are better,

in this respect, than the existing ones -- they're still fantasy names

which will be unfamiliar with someone who knows only the names of the

letters of the English alphabet.



I'll also give it as my opinion that you're unlikely to gain much

consensus and "buy-in" with your proposed renaming and reordering.

Which needn't mean that your proposal is bad, but if it's not widely

adopted (among the Shaw-alphabet-using community), it will be less

useful than if it were.



Finally, I think that the fact that the Shaw alphabet uses

voiced/voiceless pairs of letters should not be ignored; putting them

in a close correspondence seems more aesthetic to me (either p-t-k ...

b-d-g or p-b-t-d-k-g). But that's my opinion, influenced by the order

on the Reading Key and by the comments in Tolkien's description of the

tengwar, the letters used to write e.g. Elvish languages, where also

letters with similar sounds were grouped together.

--

Philip Newton

Right, not to mention that there IS an order to the shaw alphabet, and
there seems no reason to undo it for new naming conventions. The ones
we have seem easy enough for me, and while, by no means, the dimmest
bulb in the drawer, I am not the brightest either. On a simple average,
I find that the peep bib tot naming scheme is fine.

If it ain't baroque...

Anyway, Back to the order, if the roman alphabet is arbitrary, why not
add that to one of the reasons that ours is better? It is *less*
arbitrary with our paired voice and voiceless letters.

--Star

--- Philip Newton <philip.newton@...> wrote:

> On 8/11/05, paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink11@...> wrote:
> > A while back I suggested an Alternate Shavian Alphabet order with
> > more distinctive names. Maybe we could use that as a starting
> point.
> > I think it is also a good idea that the more commonly used letters
> > should be at the beginning of the Alphabet.
>
> In principle, a good idea. But I think that inertia is hard to
> overcome -- for example, the order of the letters in the Roman
> alphabet is essentially arbitrary, but I doubt that any attempt at
> re-ordering them would catch on. (And historically, new letters are
> usually added to the end, as the Romans did with Y and Z, for
> example,
> as if they were afraid to disturb the order of letters they
> inherited.)
>
> > Here is the new proposed order.
> >
> > 1. Adoo (ado)
> > 2. Alef (ash)
> > 3. Aitch (Ice)
> > 4. Bet (Bib)
> [snip]
>
> > Suggestions?
>
> You wrote that you were "concerned that the [...] Names of the Shaw
> Alphabet might be an unnecessary hurdle for someone familar with the
> order of the Roman Alphabet." I'm not sure how these names are
> better,
> in this respect, than the existing ones -- they're still fantasy
> names
> which will be unfamiliar with someone who knows only the names of the
> letters of the English alphabet.
>
> I'll also give it as my opinion that you're unlikely to gain much
> consensus and "buy-in" with your proposed renaming and reordering.
> Which needn't mean that your proposal is bad, but if it's not widely
> adopted (among the Shaw-alphabet-using community), it will be less
> useful than if it were.
>
> Finally, I think that the fact that the Shaw alphabet uses
> voiced/voiceless pairs of letters should not be ignored; putting them
> in a close correspondence seems more aesthetic to me (either p-t-k
> ...
> b-d-g or p-b-t-d-k-g). But that's my opinion, influenced by the order
> on the Reading Key and by the comments in Tolkien's description of
> the
> tengwar, the letters used to write e.g. Elvish languages, where also
> letters with similar sounds were grouped together.
> --
> Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>
>


=========
http://www.livejournal.com/users/wodentoad

Just because you're evil on the inside, doesn't mean you can't look pretty on the outside.
--Mother Mae-Eye



____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

How should /3^/ be represented in a one symbol per phoneme writing system?

Shavian has a solution and a convention.
Dictionary keys have a convention but most are digraphic so they sidestep
the issue.
The issue is how should 3^ or 3r be represented in a unigraphic system?

Help is needed on Unifon II. Classic Unifon used a digraph 3R for /3^/.

Unifon was supposed to be based on the Thorndike-Barnhart Dicitonary key
but the TBD uses schwa and Unifon doesn't except with R.
cR for /3^/ and /&^/ was not ideal because it is difficult to assign a
digraph to a particular sound in a lookup table. The CMU dictionary uses ER1 and
ER0 for these two sounds.

It would be easier to let R or 3 represent ER1 /3^/ and ER0 /&^/.
when stress is not marked or when irregular stress is marked with a separate
symbol.
MURDER = mR-dR with default stress on the first syllable. occur = &'kR
The stress mark identifies the 'R or ER1 rather than ER0 and unstressed &
identifies
AH0 rather than AH1 in the CMU directory.

I think the use of *u for *up could be either be dropped or u could be the
symbol for both & and V with the default rule or the stress mark
distinguishing AH1 or AH0. u'gO would identify which. 'sOfu for sofa is still a little
dissonant or visually disruptive because the terminal u is associated with the
/u/ sound. There is no instance in tradspel where a terminal u is
interpreted as a schwa. There is one instance where a terminal o is interpreted as a
/u/ or /U/ or /&/ *to. However, using *ho for *who is still dissonant.

sOfc is also disruptive because of the legacy associations attached to the
letter c.
It takes considerable effort to reinterpret c as a lazy-u. I prefer & or @
for the schwa.
The only problem with these symbols is that in most fonts they are oversized
and therefore typographically challenged. & is preferred because @ is a
reserved symbol on the Web.
Many programs automatically interpret any string with an @ as an email
address.

To make Unifon more isomorphic with the Thorndike Barnhart, we created
Unifon II which assigns schwa /@/ or /&/ to the redundant <c>.
MURMUR mêr-m&r in the TBD, is written mcrmcr in Classic Unifon and the same
in U2.
mcrmcr is the keyboard map for M3RM3R - which is close to how the word
appears when the unifont is installed.

InterCap notation tries to simulate display Unifon. mcrmcr is written
M3RM3R.
it could also be written MrMr or M3M3 but this is not as visually
satisfying.

The basic problem with InterCap other than being typgraphically challenged
is that it cannot be typed as fast as a lowercase notation unless one uses the
cap lock key.
ANOTHER in InterCap is 3'N3d3R or 3Nvd3R or 3'Nvdr. A convention needs to
be established. What do you recommend? SHAW map: anuDar anuDP

ANOTHER &-nuth`&r in TBD, unuDcr in Classic Unifon and cnuDcr in Unifon II.
The turned u (or lazy-u) and the upright u followed by a consonant have
about the same sound. The difference is primarily one of duration and stress.
This acoustical difference can be phonemic. That is, it can change the
meaning of a word.

It is common for pronunciation guides to use digraphs. Unifon is not
supposed to have any.
Thus there should be a symbol for schwer: IPA /3/ or /3r/. It could be
assigned to R altho there would be no requirement that non-rhotics pronounce
the R. The shape of the 3R could be a ligatured 3R. This is not a pretty
letter but it is one that has been suggested before.

I believe that the i/t/a had a symbol /R for the the schwer. I can't be
sure because I have no i/t/a dictionary or long transcription. G.B. Shaw was
very insightful to recommend that at least one book be published using the Shaw
Alphabet. This establishes usage and solves the problems we are having with
the Unifon and i/t/a augmented alphabets.

For those unfamiliar with Unifon, here is a simple tabular representation of
the
correspondences. There are key words. The top spelling is in keyboard
Unifon followed by display Unifon when there is room, lower spelling (all caps)
is in tradspel or traditional spelling. uDcr is given as the classic Unifon
spelling where u = /V/ and cr = /&r/.
If another had been the key word classic unifon wold be unuDcr and Unifon II
would be
cnuDcr.



Those who are familiar with the IPA will find the next table useful

Hi Star
Yes, Tweeking, yes.
I am willing to restrain my impulses for unrestricted change if I
can find some co-operation.
Thanks for starting the ball rolling.
I am still trying to persuade Philip to go along.

First, I am not a fan of either bee or bib, but how about splitting
the difference and calling it Beeb. Sounds better than bub or boob,
which might confused with Tit.
Can not have people embarrassed to use the letter names.
So only as a starting point, lets look at what we can do.
1. Adoo (ado)
> 2. Alef (ash)
> 3. Beeb (Bib) rhymes with Dweebs
> 4. Delta (dead)
> 5. Ester (egg)
> 6. Ein-way (age) rhymes with Janeway from Star Trek Voyager
> 7. Fey (Fee)
> 8. Guggle or Gimmel (Gag)
> 9. Hey (Ha-Ha)
> 10. Ai-way (Ice) rhymes with Highway

As I told Philip, I was "concerned that the Original Samples/Names
of the Shaw Alphabet were an unnecessary hurdle for someone familar
with the order of the Roman Alphabet."
These names are better, in the respect, that these names are Names,
not Common Nouns which represent other things.
The new names are being tailored to be representative of the sound
being named, without having an pre-existing meaning.
Also there is no reason that we could not retain something of the
same order of Letters as the Roman Alphabet. The Cyrillic, Hebrew
and Greek Alphabets all have similar Letter Orders, with out any
adverse effect, that I can see. It certainly helps me when I am
looking for a word in a foreign Dictionary.

As for getting consensus and "buy-in" on the renaming and reordering
the Shaw Alphabet.
I think we already have a consensus that there is a problem with
some of the names.
As for tweaking some of the names, it has been done in the past and
it will be done in the future.
How many people use Err instead of Urge as the Shavian letter name
for the Stressed "Er" sound?
Also there is the fact that this question keeps coming up from
novice users.
I don't think the problem can be layed to rest by saying, hey that's
a good idea, but I don't think the rest of them will agree.

As for Philip's point that the Shaw alphabet uses
voiced/voiceless pairs of letters and this correspondence should not
be ignored. The close correspondence in sound should be matched by a
close correspondence in Letter order.
Personally, I don't think we need to highlight this relationship in
the ordering of the letters because it is already highlighted in the
symetry of the letter shapes. But anyway, we could modify the
Shavian alphabet to pair up these letters, while still retaining
something of the semblence of the Roman Alphabet. (i.e. a b p d t e
v f g k h i j ch ...)
Aesthetics seem less important to me than simplicity and ease of
learning.

Comments?

Regards, Paul V.
___________________attached_______________________
--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, Star Raven
<celestraof12worlds@y...> wrote:
> > P.S. It is too early to stand against the new names. It was just
a
> > starting point and incomplete to boot.
> > You will just have to wait.
> > Restrain yourself, girl. You will get your chance.
>
> PPPPBBBLLLLLTTTTT!
>
> Now that's over, we can get on to the business. I agree that yes,
the
> original names could use some tweaking, but I don't think we
should go
> so far as to re-do the whole thing. Perhaps, like in English we
> consider names like our English letters.
>
> A-ee
> Bee
> See
> Dee
> Ee
> Ef
> Gee
> and so on, but reworked for our letters. Pip bib gig t-- well, you
get
> the idea.
>
> --Star

tithhmi wrote:

>is there any kind of order to the Shavian alphabet? Is there any
>possibility of making one?
>
>
The alphabet key in the book "Androcles and the Lion" states the order
as follows:
peep - bib
tot - dead
kick - gag
fee - vow
thigh - they
so - zoo
sure - measure
church - judge
yea - woa
hung - haha
lol - roar
mime - nun
if - eat
egg - age
ash - ice
ado - up
on - oak
wool - ooze
out - oil
ah - awe
are - or
air - err
array - ear
ian - yew

It's at the bottom of the reading key, where it says, right at the end:
"Learn the alphabet /in pairs/, as listed for Writers overleaf." On the
previous page (the overleaf) is the familiar vertical key which has the
letters in pairs, as I've printed them above.

You can find pictures of both keys on this page:
http://www.spellingsociety.org/journals/j18/shawac.php

The horizontal format key is designed for the convenience of the reader
in learning, and the letters are grouped according to shape to make it
easier for people to find the letter they are looking for. This is not
the correct order for learning the alphabet. When recited, it should be
said "peep bib, tot dead, kick gag, fee vow, thigh they, so zoo..."
etc. Notice how the last of the consonants, lol roar mime and nun, are
kept together in a logical order this way, but in the commonly
misunderstood order, they are strangely separated: lol mime (if egg
ash...), roar nun (eat age ice...)

I invite any comments on this. Any reason why it should be in any other
order than the one given in Androcles?

--
Ethan Lamoreaux - �???? �??????

paul vandenbrink wrote:

>Hi Star
>Yes, Tweeking, yes.
>I am willing to restrain my impulses for unrestricted change if I
>can find some co-operation.
>Thanks for starting the ball rolling.
>I am still trying to persuade Philip to go along.
>
>First, I am not a fan of either bee or bib, but how about splitting
>the difference and calling it Beeb. Sounds better than bub or boob,
>which might confused with Tit.
>Can not have people embarrassed to use the letter names.
>So only as a starting point, lets look at what we can do.
> 1. Adoo (ado)
>
>
>>2. Alef (ash)
>>3. Beeb (Bib) rhymes with Dweebs
>>4. Delta (dead)
>>5. Ester (egg)
>>6. Ein-way (age) rhymes with Janeway from Star Trek Voyager
>>7. Fey (Fee)
>>8. Guggle or Gimmel (Gag)
>>9. Hey (Ha-Ha)
>>10. Ai-way (Ice) rhymes with Highway
>>
>>
>
>As I told Philip, I was "concerned that the Original Samples/Names
>of the Shaw Alphabet were an unnecessary hurdle for someone familar
>with the order of the Roman Alphabet."
>These names are better, in the respect, that these names are Names,
>not Common Nouns which represent other things.
>The new names are being tailored to be representative of the sound
>being named, without having an pre-existing meaning.
>Also there is no reason that we could not retain something of the
>same order of Letters as the Roman Alphabet. The Cyrillic, Hebrew
>and Greek Alphabets all have similar Letter Orders, with out any
>adverse effect, that I can see. It certainly helps me when I am
>looking for a word in a foreign Dictionary.
>
>As for getting consensus and "buy-in" on the renaming and reordering
>the Shaw Alphabet.
>I think we already have a consensus that there is a problem with
>some of the names.
>As for tweaking some of the names, it has been done in the past and
>it will be done in the future.
>How many people use Err instead of Urge as the Shavian letter name
>for the Stressed "Er" sound?
>Also there is the fact that this question keeps coming up from
>novice users.
>I don't think the problem can be layed to rest by saying, hey that's
>a good idea, but I don't think the rest of them will agree.
>
>As for Philip's point that the Shaw alphabet uses
>voiced/voiceless pairs of letters and this correspondence should not
>be ignored. The close correspondence in sound should be matched by a
>close correspondence in Letter order.
>Personally, I don't think we need to highlight this relationship in
>the ordering of the letters because it is already highlighted in the
>symetry of the letter shapes. But anyway, we could modify the
>Shavian alphabet to pair up these letters, while still retaining
>something of the semblence of the Roman Alphabet. (i.e. a b p d t e
>v f g k h i j ch ...)
>Aesthetics seem less important to me than simplicity and ease of
>learning.
>
>Comments?
>
>Regards, Paul V.
>
>
Well, for what it's worth, here are the changes I've been using for some
time. Not as radical as some, but it fixes a few problems.

peep bib
tot dad (Dead: negative)
kick gig (Gag: negative)
How about "The tot kicked him till he gagged, now he's dead..." :)
fee vow
thigh they
so zoo
sure genre (Measure: what sound is that?)
church judge
yea woa
ing ha (hung, haha: Confusion! Also, Haha unnecessarily long)
lol roar
mime nun
if eat
egg age
ash ice
ado up
on oak
wool ooze
out oil
ah awesome (In some dialects, ah and awe are pronounced the same)
are or
air urge (Many people pronounce Err like Air)
better ear (Better is bettER than ARRay, which is not the right sound in
all dialects)
ian yew

So there you have it. Make of it what you like. Comments are most welcome.

--
Ethan Lamoreaux - ·𐑰𐑔𐑩𐑯 ·𐑤𐑨𐑥𐑩𐑮𐑴

On 8/14/05, Ethan <ethanl@...> wrote:
> The horizontal format key is designed for the convenience of the reader in
> learning, and the letters are grouped according to shape to make it easier
> for people to find the letter they are looking for. This is not the correct
> order for learning the alphabet. When recited, it should be said "peep bib,
> tot dead, kick gag, fee vow, thigh they, so zoo..." etc. Notice how the
> last of the consonants, lol roar mime and nun, are kept together in a
> logical order this way, but in the commonly misunderstood order, they are
> strangely separated: lol mime (if egg ash...), roar nun (eat age ice...)

Very good point; you've convinced me.

> Any reason why it should be in any other
> order than the one given in Androcles?

Also a good question IMO.
--
Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>