Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

On 1/14/06, Dana C Durkee <danadurkee@...> wrote:
> So if anyone does not have their own copy, or perhaps might want
> another for a friend or just for safekeeping, here is your chance.

I've also got a dozen or so copies at home which I bought over time,
intending to sell them to members of the list, but I never really
advertised it. So if anyone's interested and can't get hold of a copy
via Amazon or ABEBooks or similar, feel free to get hold of me and
arrange something. (Perhaps you want a second copy you can scribble
in, or take apart in pieces to put on a scanner or something?)

Mostly paperback copies, but I have one or two hardback copies (the
ones that were placed in public libraries, IIRC) as well.
--
Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>

On 1/13/06, paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink11@...> wrote:
> Have you ever heard someone say off=ten with the t-sound? (328)

Yes, occasionally. It's not how I say it, though.

> All these duplications (400. With) not good.

Perhaps it came from different capitalisation - "with/With". The
source should have neutralised that difference when counting words
already.

> P.P.S. 371, I disagree with your using apostrophes (I'm) to represent
> contractions in the spelling. The only way they make any
> sense is if we look at the original Roman Spelling.

I also tend not to use apostrophes when writing Shavian. I don't feel
particularly strongly about the issue, though.

> P.P.P.S I say "hC" for here and "hID" for hear. They are distinct
> to me. Do you hear them as Homonyms? Curious.

They're homonyms for me. As far as I can tell, I pronounce them identically.

As do, I suppose, the people who mis-spell "Hear, hear!" as "Here, here!".
--
Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>

On 1/15/06, paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink11@...> wrote:
> I think the Schwa is used mainly for counterpoint, and if there isn't
> a stressed longer vowel in one of the syllables of the word, the
> Schwa can't exist as a valid pronunciation.

I think it's got more to do with stress -- and since every word, in
isolation, must have at least one stressed syllable, one-syllable
words can't really have shwas unless the stress disappears when you
say the word in context with another word, as sometimes happens in
connected speech, especially with "function" words (prepositions,
conjunctions, articles, etc.) but usually not with "content" words
(nouns, adjectives, verbs, etc.).

I think "a" is the only one-syllable word where Shavian explicitly
recognises the unstressed pronunciation (the stand-alone
pronunciation, for me, is /E/).

> P.S. Interestingly, The "a" (indefinite marker) occassionally merges
> with the word. Is it a bound marker. I'd say normally not.
> (across, alone, along, around, astray, again, aways, Alert?)

I'm not sure whether that's the same morpheme.

> P.P.P.S. I think we should spell each word as an indenpendant
> standalone unit and not as the sound changes when two words are
> slurred together in rapid idiomatic speech. Just my preference.
> I think it is easier for the reader to decode spaced out speech.

In general, I think I agree with this. I'd tend to write more
carefully than I speak.

That's also the reason I'd be inclined to write "from" as /from/ even
if I say it /frum/, since I feel that /from/ is how it "should be"
pronounced if I were speaking carefully and non-connectedly.
--
Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>

filip:
F wUd bI interested in getiN a skrAp kopi. H skrQnJiest
wun jMv got.
hQ muc for H bUk n hQ muc for H Siping?
n wEr kAn F send jM mF cek?


Philip Newton <philip.newton@...> wrote: On 1/14/06, Dana C Durkee <danadurkee@...> wrote:
> So if anyone does not have their own copy, or perhaps might want
> another for a friend or just for safekeeping, here is your chance.

I've also got a dozen or so copies at home which I bought over time,
intending to sell them to members of the list, but I never really
advertised it. So if anyone's interested and can't get hold of a copy
via Amazon or ABEBooks or similar, feel free to get hold of me and
arrange something. (Perhaps you want a second copy you can scribble
in, or take apart in pieces to put on a scanner or something?)

Mostly paperback copies, but I have one or two hardback copies (the
ones that were placed in public libraries, IIRC) as well.
--
Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>


SPONSORED LINKS
Shaw rug Shaw carpets Corporate culture Business culture of china Shaw flooring Shaw florist

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "shawalphabet" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shawalphabet-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---------------------------------






---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.

Hi Kirk and fellow Shavians!

Kirk's is the first message (he's the guy who wants the scroungiest copy of
Androcles in stock - I guess he wants to tear it apart and scan it) I've ever
received on this list that actually appeared in Shaw Alphabet. I'm running
AOL's rather primitive Macintosh mail client - AOL no longer upgrades its
application for Mac. How'd you do it, Kirk?

Bob Richmond
Knoxville TN and Gastonia NC

Bob Richmond wrote:
> Kirk's is the first message [...] I've ever received on this
> list that actually appeared in Shaw Alphabet. [...] How'd you
> do it, Kirk?

With [FONT face=Androcles size=7] (angle brackets instead of square
brackets).

I'm not sure whether the difference is in the HTML he used or whether it's
merely that he used the "Androcles" font, rather than the "Lionspaw" or
"Shaw Sans No. 2" that have been more popular on the list recently.

Perhaps "Androcles" is the only Shavian font you have installed on your Mac?

Philip

Hi Philip!

>>Perhaps "Androcles" is the only Shavian font you have installed on your
Mac?<<

I do have it installed. I haven't been able to install any of the newer ones
- fonts in the new Mac operating system are a complete mystery as far as I'm
concerned - you can download 'em, but you can't install 'em.

Bob

If you're using Mac OS X, they're actually pretty easy to install once
you figure out where they go. But there are two places you might want
to put them.

1. If you want all users to be able to use the font (useful if you have
multiple user accounts), you need to put them in "Library/Fonts" on
your hard drive.
2. If you want the fonts to be available to only one user (useful if
you want to keep your fonts separate or prevent name conflicts), you
need to put them in "~/Library/Fonts" where "~" is your user folder.

All you have to do is drag the fonts into either of these folders (but
not both) and they'll immediately become available to most
applications. You may have to relaunch some before they'll see the new
fonts, though.

Regards,
Joseph Spicer
𐑡𐑴𐑕𐑩𐑓 𐑕𐑐𐑲𐑕𐑼

On Jan 16, 2006, at 4:03 AM, RSRICHMOND@... wrote:

> Hi Philip!
>
> >>Perhaps "Androcles" is the only Shavian font you have installed on
> your Mac?<<
>
> I do have it installed. I haven't been able to install any of the
> newer ones - fonts in the new Mac operating system are a complete
> mystery as far as I'm concerned - you can download 'em, but you can't
> install 'em.
>
> Bob

Hi Paul,

Yes, its good to be back to "Shavian Discussing". The main glaring
error the one that I had in mind was for the word "born" was spelt in
Shavian as, (bpn); when it should have been (bPn). They did correct
that error, finally. Of which I am truly relieved.

About the other words your bringing to this groups attention. Are
dialectical. And yes, they are rather valid too. I even
pronounce "with" as (wiT). But, at least the other questionable
words aren't simply bad spelling; but probably how Simon Ager
pronounces those words.

Best of Regards,

Carl (The Utahn Shavian Expert)

-- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink"
<pvandenbrink11@h...> wrote:
>
> Hi Carl
> It is certainly acceptable, now.
> I'd spell 4 words differently myself, but I am going by my own
> pronunciation. The Ugly Canadian strikes again.
> In fact in my last recomendation (4), I would differ with the
> authorative (www.dictionary.com) {G-d forbid)
> 1. dignity -> dignatI instead of dignitI
> 2. with -> wiT instead of wiH
> 3. spirit -> spCat instead of spirit
> 4. conscience - kynSins instead of konSans
> consciousness would be kynSisnes, for example.
> I really have a problem putting the Schwa sound in the middle of
CVC
> syllable, even if it is unstressed. I feel that this minimal vowel
> sound can not carry the load.
> Although, I am certain some people hear it as "kanSasnas".
> Opinions?
> Regards, Paul V.
> P.S. Nice to see you back, Carl
> --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Carl G. Easton"
> <shavintel16@y...> wrote:
> > I'm so relieve see that www.omniglot.com has corrected their
errors
> on
> > the abbreviations and the tranliteration of the First Article of
> Human
> > rights. Did anyone else notice these corrections.
>

I'm glad someone noticed the corrections. I send those in, so it's not
Simon Ager's pronunciation. Actually, the spellings are based on those
used in Androcles. The first three you point out are dialectal
variants, so I thought I'd follow the original example.
I see what you mean with the schwa in "conscience", though. That's also
dialectal--since the accent I was trying to spell isn't quite like
mine, I guess one of my phonemes slipped though. Are there any other
problems with it? If so, I could fix them and send in the revised
version.

Regards,
Joseph Spicer
𐑡𐑴𐑕𐑩𐑓 𐑕𐑐𐑲𐑕𐑼

On Jan 17, 2006, at 5:02 PM, Carl G. Easton wrote:

> Hi Paul,
>
> Yes, its good to be back to "Shavian Discussing". The main glaring
> error the one that I had in mind was for the word "born" was spelt in
> Shavian as, (bpn); when it should have been (bPn). They did correct
> that error, finally. Of which I am truly relieved.
>
> About the other words your bringing to this groups attention. Are
> dialectical. And yes, they are rather valid too. I even
> pronounce "with" as (wiT). But, at least the other questionable
> words aren't simply bad spelling; but probably how Simon Ager
> pronounces those words.
>
> Best of Regards,
>
> Carl (The Utahn Shavian Expert)
>
> -- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink"
> <pvandenbrink11@h...> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Carl
>> It is certainly acceptable, now.
>> I'd spell 4 words differently myself, but I am going by my own
>> pronunciation. The Ugly Canadian strikes again.
>> In fact in my last recomendation (4), I would differ with the
>> authorative (www.dictionary.com) {G-d forbid)
>> 1. dignity -> dignatI instead of dignitI
>> 2. with -> wiT instead of wiH
>> 3. spirit -> spCat instead of spirit
>> 4. conscience - kynSins instead of konSans
>> consciousness would be kynSisnes, for example.
>> I really have a problem putting the Schwa sound in the middle of
> CVC
>> syllable, even if it is unstressed. I feel that this minimal vowel
>> sound can not carry the load.
>> Although, I am certain some people hear it as "kanSasnas".
>> Opinions?
>> Regards, Paul V.
>> P.S. Nice to see you back, Carl