Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

hE gFz (/hV & /daSep)
wuts hApeniN?
did V fDget t tEk yP /prOzAk tadE?
R V kumpItiN t sI hM kAn bI H mOst dafItist?
/SYvIan iz nyt a pypVlXatI kyntest.
nObudI JuJaz "H TCI v relativatI", bI hQ menI
pIpal lIk H wE it lUks. it IHD wxks P it duzant.
/SYvIan wxks. n wen H nId arFzaz,
/SYvIan wil bI HX.
CragRdles.
jPz trMlI, /pYl /vI.
___________________________atAct_________________
> --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com,
> --- Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
>
> unfPcanatlI, /SEvIan iz Just a kVrIosatI. t pqnt HAt Qt iz not
> undDAmbiSan but onastI.
>
> hQevD, Az F YlsO sed, it kUd bikum muc mP; Yl H "fYlts" n
> "erDz" Hus fR brYt up R nO signifikant hindrans t it dMiN sO.
>
> /hV /b
>
>
> /daSep respyndad:
> F disagI. H mOr kumpeliN /SEvian cAn bI mEd
> tM bI, Ha mOr apIlih it SUd bI tM uHz, HOz
> hM sI Ha Vs v an yltDnativ Alfabet az, wel,
> tM pUt it kFndli, kwikzotik.
>
> evD kwikzotik,
> dSep
>

Hi Algernon
We have to realise a Phonemic Alphabet is different.
It has different strengths and weaknesses from the
traditional Roman Alphabet.
Standardization of Roman Alphabet Spelling of English had a lot of
benefits, but in a computer age it
is no longer necessary for everyone to attempt to keep their writing
inside some artificial, ultimately imperfect standard.
The English language changes over time. Words are added.
Pronunciations are simplified. We need a system of writing that
has sufficient looseness to allow for minor pronunciation
differences.
Still there is no need to exagerate accent differences.
We do need to provide as much internal consistency as possible.
So if we see a simpler Shavian representation/spelling of a word,
that still produces
an acceptable pronunciation of the word, we should adopt that
spelling and try and use it consistently.

And as for your question as to whether we need to create a
standard, formal paradigm of Shavian spelling.
I believe we need to provide examples of the most common English
words in Shavian Spelling with all the common variations.
Not as a straight-jacket, but as an educational tool.
A certain significant percentage of people, have great difficulty in
breaking a word down into Phonemes. (Phonics doesn't work for every
child) As well, it is helpful for everyone
to see regularized Shavian Spelling, until they have internalized all
the additional phonemes in Shavian. For example,
I still regularly see people use a Vowel letter + "roar" to make
the equivalent of one of Syllabic R-sounds, for which there is an
existing Shavian letter.

Regards, Paul V.
P.S. My personal opinion is that American speakers should limit
themselves to 46 of the Shavian Letters, as "Ian" and "On" are not
commonly pronounced in most American accents, but that is an
individual writer's decision.
______________________attached_________________________________
--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "L.G." wrote:
Paul.
Just to recap an essential point.
I think that this is the greatest weakness of a phonemic alphabet.
If we're to conform to a standard for formal texts, manuals, books,
web documents, even if not in email discussion, then one accent is
implicitly asserted to be superior to all others,
or at least "more standard".
And this places everyone else at a slight disadvantage.

Having said that, there are at least two different
standardised spelling systems of English using the Roman alphabet
(American and British), which are fundamentally similar,
and which are more or less intelligible
to all educated English speakers, regardless of their accent.
I'd find it hard to imitate in my writing, for
example, an American Mid-Western accent in Shavian,
since I am not be sure of
the distribution of its phonemes,
but I don't have any problem understanding
any American writer's Shavian, as long as he is moderately competent
in writing Shavian phonetically.

As long as we all try to use the 48 Shavian letters
to approximate as best we can our own accents, I don't think there
should be any problem with mutual intelligibility, even if our
spellings might differ a little. As for a
standard, formal paradigm of Shavian spelling, do we really need one?

Yours truly, Algernon

dshep wrote:

> /> But even discounting stressed or unstressed vowels,/
> /> there are 2 different but phonetically valid ways to spell /
> /> and, the and of. Perhaps, you haven't noticed the differences, /
> /> except in the case of "HI" for "the"./
>
>
> but /SEvian iz not fanetik, iz it? And if
> not, Hen eni vAriant wEz tM pranQns (And
> spel) yr ov nO impyrtans -- wun wE SUd
> safFs.
>
> az evD,
> /dSep
> .........

/dSep, Would you favor writing "Give me a apple" rather than "Give me an
apple", because "an" is simply a phonetic variation of "a"?

--
Ethan Lamoreaux - in Shavian, ·𐑰𐑔𐑩𐑯 ·𐑤𐑨𐑥𐑩𐑮𐑴

The LORD bless thee, and keep thee:
The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee:
The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.

dshep wrote:

>
> /--- In //shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com/
> <mailto:shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com>/, /
> /--- paul vandenbrink wrote:/
>
>
> /> I think the 4 documented Shavian abbreviations work /
> /> quite nicely for a number reasons which I have previously /
> /> discussed./
>
>
> HE wurk, but kompramIz Ha fanImik
> strukcD ov /SEvian, it sImz tM mI.
> His mE not bI impYrtant tM V. mF
> Vs ov -Ha- az defanit yrtikal wurks
> YlsO, in Ha senz HAt V kAnot lFkli
> miskanstrM its mInih, Onli dispVMt its
> Vs.
>
> ragyrdz.
> /dSep
> ...........

/dSep, F fFnd it hRd t undDstAnd hwF V hAv a problam wiT VziN koman
abrIvIESanz in /SEvWn, hwFl At H sEm tFm V rIplEs mAnI v H /SEvWn letDz
wiT jP On non-stAndDd speliNz: Yr, yr, ur, ets. insted v P, R, x, ets.;
n rIvxsiN hy-hy n huN, hwic iz _/vXI/_ kanfVziN. nQ F dOnt mFnd if
sumwun wynts t Vz "Ha, av, tM, And" insted v "H, v, t, n"; but jP uHD
cEnJaz dM nuTiN t help mI rId jP rFtiN wiT klXitI. sO hwF kamplEn abQt
abrIvIESanz?

--
Ethan Lamoreaux - in Shavian, ·𐑰𐑔𐑩𐑯 ·𐑤𐑨𐑥𐑩𐑮𐑴

The LORD bless thee, and keep thee:
The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee:
The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.

> I think the 4 documented Shavian abbreviations work

> quite nicely for a number reasons which I have previously

> discussed.





HE wurk, but kompramIz Ha fanImik

strukcD ov /SEvian, it sImz tM mI.

His mE not bI impYrtant tM V. mF

Vs ov -Ha- az defanit yrtikal wurks

YlsO, in Ha senz HAt V kAnot lFkli

miskanstrM its mInih, Onli dispVMt its

Vs.



ragyrdz.

/dSep

...........



/dSep, F fFnd it hRd t undDstAnd hwF V hAv a problam wiT VziN koman
abrIvIESanz in /SEvWn, hwFl At H sEm tFm V rIplEs mAnI v H /SEvWn letDz wiT
jP On non-stAndDd speliNz: Yr, yr, ur, ets. insted v P, R, x, ets.; n
rIvxsiN hy-hy n huN, hwic iz vXI kanfVziN. nQ F dOnt mFnd if sumwun wynts t
Vz "Ha, av, tM, And" insted v "H, v, t, n"; but jP uHD cEnJaz dM nuTiN t
help mI rId jP rFtiN wiT klXitI. sO hwF kamplEn abQt abrIvIESanz?



/dSep, hQ kAn V fFnd sO muc t bI obJekSanabal in /SEvIan? fxst, it woz hAf a
duzan tYl n SPt letDz HAt wx H roN wE rQnd, nQ kompQnd letDz SUdnt bI Vzd n
abrIvIESanz Just Rnt kOSD.



ekseptiN jP On dilibDat mistEks, HX R a kupal mP odatIz:

- kompramIz (kompramFz)

- senz (sens)

- dispVMt (dispVt)



hAv V RbitrXalI rIasFnd HOz letDz, tM? F dOnt mIn t sQnd kondasendiN, but
pDhAps a fUl grAsp v H Alfabet in its 'PTadoks' fPm wUd bI AdvantEJas bifP
bOldlI imbRkiN apon rAdikal YltDESanz v its fundamental elamants...



jPz cIkalI

/hV /b

Hi Ethan
Because the variant phonetic pronunciations of "the" have been
lumped together under the Shavian abbreviation "H" called "They",
I see that you are suggesting that we go the next step and
lump two other words "a" and "an" (both indefinate noun markers)
under a new Shavian Abbreviation of "a" called "Ado".
I don't think I can go for that.
The Pronunciation of "a" and "an", is more distinctly different.
There is less common ground. "a" is usually pronounced
as a Schwa (Ado) and "an" is usually pronounced as Syllabic "n"
like you hear at the end of the word "common".
Just too different.
Regards, Paul V.
____________________________attached_____________________
--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, Ethan <ethanl@...> wrote:
> dshep wrote:
>
> > /> But even discounting stressed or unstressed vowels,/
> > /> there are 2 different but phonetically valid ways to spell /
> > /> and, the and of. Perhaps, you haven't noticed the
differences, /
> > /> except in the case of "HI" for "the"./
> >
> >
> > but /SEvian iz not fanetik, iz it? And if
> > not, Hen eni vAriant wEz tM pranQns (And
> > spel) yr ov nO impyrtans -- wun wE SUd
> > safFs.
> >
> > az evD,
> > /dSep
> > .........
>
> /dSep, Would you favor writing "Give me a apple" rather than "Give
me an
> apple", because "an" is simply a phonetic variation of "a"?

hF /daSep
fxst, F dOnt TiNk abrIvIESunz kompramIz H /SYvIan
speliN sistam. evrI lRJ sistem hAs eksepSunz.
Az lYN Az HE R klClI dafFnd, n dM nyt krIEt enI
indItDmenasIz in hQ sumTiN iz spelt, it iz stil
a vAlid sistem.
sekund, abrIvIESunz R YlwEz ypSunal.
it iz pDfektlI OkE fP V t spel Qt enI wxd fUlI,
fP enI numbD v rIzanz.
it lUks yd n it tEks mP letxz, but HOz R nyt
rIzanz t sE V R ryN.
dOnt wDI abQt it sO muc.
ragardz, /pYl /vI.
pI. es. duz enI wun els disagrI wiT mI
yn H sekund pqnt?
_______________attached________________________
--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Hugh Birkenhead" <mixsynth@...>
wrote:

/daSep sed:
>
> HE wurk, but kompramIz Ha fanImik
>
> strukcD ov /SEvian, it sImz tM mI.
>
> His mE not bI impYrtant tM V. mF
>
> Vs ov -Ha- az defanit yrtikal wurks
>
> YlsO, in Ha senz HAt V kAnot lFkli
>
> miskanstrM its mInih, Onli dispVMt its Vs.

Paul or Hugh said:
> > I think that the 4 documented Shavian abbreviations work
>
> > quite nicely for a number of reasons which I have previously
>
> > discussed.

> pI. es. duz enI wun els disagrI wiT mI

> yn H sekund pqnt?



nO, F dOnt disagrI wiH V. HE R indId opSanal, n Az suc SUdnt kYz enI
abJekSan.



/hV /b

Greetings A.M.
I agree. As a Canadian, I had to suffer with American pronunciation
and British Spelling, but after years of fumbling around, I now
consider myself fully bi-lingual, at least when I am reading
a phonetic transcription.
As I have the simplified vowel pronunciation of an American English
Speaker,
I rarely use the Shaw Letters "On", "Ian" and "Err"(Urge),
prefering to use "Ah", "Eat"+"Ado" and "Array".
Actually, under duress, I do use "Err" in in Multi-syllable words
where the "er" sound is very distinctly pronounced and is in the
syllable with primary stress (very rare) (i.e. prefer, concur,
urgent, early, irksome, return).
I also use "Err" less consistently but sometimes when the "er" sound
is starts a single syllable word, or is embedded in a single syllable
word (somewhat less rare) (urge, purge, earth, word, stirred, bird,
turn, hurt, jerk)
As far as I can tell most people, have no difficulty reading my words.

Regards, Paul V.
pI. es. Az fR Az F kAn tel mOst pIpal, hAv nO difakultI rIdiN mF
wxdz, Az lYN Az F rapIt mFself wen HE sE, "E".
_______________________attached________________________________
--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "A.M. Callaway" <...> wrote:
Well, minor variations in spelling, as far as I can see, shouldn't
cause any major hassles.
After all, we have variations with the latin alphabet as it
is. For example, I'm an Aussie of English descent,
therefore I spell colour, centre,
through, tyre and litre. However, I'm able to handle color,
centre, thru, tire and
liter without my head exploding.
A.M. Callaway

P.S. You can take a look at EAF * at my website.
(* EAFonetik = Extended ANSI Fonetik. A Shavian based Alphabet scheme
using more or less Roman Letters and Diacritics)

reply to message 1482, in which
paul vandenbrink protested:



it duz mAtD t mOst v us hC.

Az it SUd. Ha fjMcD ov /SEvian
mAtDz tM mI az wel, uHDwFz F
wUd not boHD (tM evriwunz dalFt)
wiH HIz fjMtFl efDts tM rendD
/SEvian mOr pAlatabal fYr a wFdD
Ydians (jes, His iz jOr kjM tM
obJekt)



n F wUd hRdlI kYl /SYvIan a hRmles frylik ...

nYr wUd F, HO sum dM, apArantli,
kansidD it az suc; fYr mF pyrt His
wYz a fIbal atempt At fasISasnas.


it hAz a rIal pDpus n a lYN histPI.
Az a fPmD sistam prOgrAmD, F nO H vAlV v gUd kOd.
/SYvIan iz verI tFt klIn kOd. F lFk it.
it iz lyJikal n intxnalI kunsistant.

but it kUd bI simplD, Hus IziD,
Hus betD. iz His not Ha gOl ov
progrAmDz?


it iz lyJikal n intxnalI kunsistant.

not az muc az it kUd Izali bI
mEd tM bI.


HX wil YlwEz bI inkunsistunsIz,

but NwF tolarEt HOz inkansistansiz
Hat yr sO Izali alimanEtad?


evD kjMrias,
/dSep