Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

Hugh Birkenhead wrote:

> /
> ///
>
> wQ, n F TYt F woz H OnlI wun!
>
>
>
> F plE /hAmand Pgan, pjAnO, trumpat, drumz n pDkuSan, but F fOkas on
> Pgan n rOdz pjAnO HIz dEz.
>
>
>
> F plE n prAktis wiH 6 bAndz At H mOmant, plEiN fuNk, blMz, r&b, mOtQn
> n JAz. sumhQ F fit it Yl in.
>
>
>
> enIwun els?
>
>
>
> /hV /b
>
F hAv plEd a bit v trumpat bIfP, but F wuznt Ebl t tEk H tFm t bIkum
prOfiSant, n Az V nO, V hAf t bI dedikEtad t kIp jP lips in SEp. Fv
nevD hAd H opDtVnitI t trF pDkuSan instramants. pDhAps wun v HIz dEz!
H GhAmand Pgan kan bI an RtfPm in itself, sins HX R sO mAnI wEz V kan
set it up. 6 bAndz! F plE in tM, mOst v H tFm. wun iz a blMgrAs bAnd,
H uHD iz a smYl Pkastra.

--
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.

/ITan rOt:



F hAv plEd a bit v trumpat bIfP, but F wuznt Ebl t tEk H tFm t bIkum
prOfiSant, n Az V nO, V hAf t bI dedikEtad t kIp jP lips in SEp.



HAt's rFt. F'v nevD rWlI prAktist H trumpat verI kansistantlI, n Az a rizult
mF teknIk hAznt imprMvd muc in 5 jCz. HX woz a tFm wen F woz gigiN on hPn 3
nFts a wIk n mF stAmina stil woznt imprMviN. but sins smYl bAnd JAz gigz R
IzID on H cops, HAt's wot F prifx.



Fv nevD hAd H opDtVnitI t trF pDkuSan instramants. pDhAps wun v HIz dEz!



mF VnivxsatI woznt verI 'JAz-sAvI' -- H mVzik dapRtmant OnlI hAd an Pkastra.
F trFd plEiN trumpat in it but it woz tM muc lFk hRd wxk. HE wx misiN a
timpanI plED sO F TYt F'd lxn Hem. F endad up plEiN timpanI wiH Hem fP TrI
jCz.



H GhAmand Pgan kan bI an RtfPm in itself, sins HX R sO mAnI wEz V kan set it
up.



V'D rFt. HX R sO menI difDant mVzikal mVdz HAt kAn bI rIkrIEtad. unfPcanatlI
F dOnt On wun. H best F kUd afPd on a mVziSan'z buJat woz a diJital klOn,
wic iz gUd inuf. H kantrOlz n sQndz rIpradVst R Fdentikal t HOz v mOst
'JenVin' hAmandz HO.



6 bAndz! F plE in tM, mOst v H tFm. wun iz a blMgrAs bAnd, H uHD iz a smYl
Pkastra.



je, F dOnt nO hQ igzAktlI F kIp Hem Yl gOiN. F Vst t dubal-bUk mFself an
Yfal lot. F'v nevD plEd blMgrAs, YlHO F plE rok n rOl (www.oneyedcats.com)
-- wot dM V plE in jP blMgrAs bAnd? hAv V got enI sAmpalz?



/hV /b

780. mjMzik

yrt, mjMzik, n literacur--HIz wer t bI H fOkus v mF profeSonal karIr. n
eksept fOr mjMzik, HE wer.

mF moHer hFerd speSal tIcerz fOr mI from H tFm F woz abQt 9 jirz-Old: 3
mjMzik tIcerz in /de mqn, 1 in /sinsinAti, 2 oHerz in /sAn frAnsiskO. HE
trFd t tIc mI t plE

/klEr de lMn, /rApsodi in blM, /mEpel lIf rAg, /styrdust, /frAki kyrl'z
/sunrFz serenEd, /dMk eliNton'z /sofistikEted lEdi, n /fAts wYler'z
/AligEtor krYl n /honi sukel rOz, but H Onli wun F lernd t plE moderatli
wel woz /styrdust.

nQ F hAv a /kAsiO kIbOrd n Am trFiN t memOrFz H mjMzik from /mF fEr
lEdi.

F hAv riten a fjM liriks n fFnali ernd a mIger liviN Az An ilustrEtor n
a rFter but, Az mOr HAn wun klFent hAz tOld mI " His asFnment wOnt mEk
jM ric, but it wil giv jM som gUd eksperiens."

*********************

reply to message 1510 from scott harrison,in which dshep received yet another reprimand: 
... ... > > > You believe Shavian has not been   > > > generally accepted because there's  > > > something drastically wrong with the > > > alphabet, ...
> > I would not use the term" drastically wrong"; what  > > about "insufficiently right"? The modifications I  > > propose are actually so modest I am continually   > > dismayed by the hostility they generate. What I  > > have argued is that any, any, objection that could  > > be made by critics, genuine linguists for example  > > (unlike we amateurs) and especially educators, if  > > they ever rip into it, should be, when possible,  > > removed beforehand. Why not? Of course, as I have  > > conceded previously, if there is no real interest in  > > promoting Shavian beyond the confines of this group,  > > to make it as easy as possible for the not-necessarily- > > interested  to acquire, then there is no point in doing  > > anything. 
> If you want to make it easy for the masses to acquire, DO NOT  > promote any modifications.  Leave it as it is currently (and has  > been for decades).  If you want modifications pursue Quikscript  > or some other alphabet.
Modifications are not going to frighten anyone away from something that is generally ignored, there are too few people who care one way or the other what we do. I fear the "masses" are never, ever going to express the slightest desire to acquire an alternative alphabet, or see the need to. The only hope I think is to make it attractive, better yet irresistible, to people who use written language on a regular basis -- this is after all a large number of people. This I think is a better goal than the maintenanceof an unsullied purity of Shavian by a handful of adherents. The generalprotestation that Shavian is decades-old, thus immune from any and allreconsideration, presumes that large numbers of people now use it on a regular basis and that any change therefore would entail real hardship is necessarily an exaggeration. We (the members of this group) are not that important (nor that many). 
> > > You believe substitutions for the four most  > > > common words are evil.
> > Evil? Surely you exaggerate. Merely unnecessary.  > > Substitutions are, perhaps, a convenience, but at the  > > loss of transparency, the transparency of every word  > > revealed as composed of phonemic elements. 
> Unnecessary, maybe.  However, they are there.  Period.  If you  > do not use them, then you are not following convention and possibly  > making it harder for someone to understand (besides using more  > characters when writing).What I propose is to use a fewer number of characters, which seems to me preferable to holding the actual count of characters in a given body of text to a minimum. I contend this promotes quicker comprehension for the beginner.
> > > You believe that if Haha doesn't stick up and  > > > Hung hang down, it will cause mass confusion.
> > Some, and unnecessary, confusion -- not for you but  > > conceivably for the unexposed. The sound of \h\ is  > > unvoiced and logically belongs in the group \p, t, k, f, s,  > > etc\; the sound \ng\ is voiced and belongs in the group  > > \b, d, g, v, z, etc\. Do you really dispute this? Supply a  > > good reason beyond inertia why the pattern set up by  > > separation into tall and deep letters should not be f > > followed through as consistently as is possible. Why  > > accept even the possibility of confusion, however slight,  > > or illogic, however modest, if the remedy is so painless?  > > The point I think is to make Shavian, as far as is possible,  > > beyond reproach, all for the purpose of being able to  > > display to the public at large, a system well worth taking up. 

> The "remedy" is not painless.  Shavian is part of the Unicode standard.   > There are fonts that have Shavian encoded into them.  Leave the  > letters alone.  Only a linguist is going to pursue the concept of a deep  > or tall being in the wrong place, and any true linguist is going to have  > other problems with Shavian anyway so worrying about one little thing  > is really pointless.  The issue is we have a standard.  That standard has  > been adopted.  Use it.  You waste time pursuing purification of Shavian  > instead of enabling people to start using it.  I am sure the people that  > have learned Shavian have not been slowed down because a deep  > and tall are "reversed".
I think it is. Again, the opinion of linguists will be more decisive than this group is willing to imagine. For one thing, if ever Shavian gets the attention of the educational system (which I believe is the best hope for any widespread recognition), the responsible authorities will want (for political cover, if no other reason) the advice and approval of language specialists, i.e., linguists and English teachers. These people will, understandably, want to have a say in anything they are asked to approve and promote, and will certainly look for flaws. Teachers especially, as they will be the ones to pursue acceptance in the classroom. If there is anything that can be cleaned up they will want it done before expending effort on its propagation -- can you blame them? The view that the present usage is "convention", defended by a group of well-meaning amateurs (that's us), will be dismissed out of hand, Unicode or not. Unicode will be expected to conform to the standards set by society, not the other way round. Perhaps the handful of people that now know Shavian were not hampered by the ha/hung reversal -- I doubt that they were as we, remember, wished to learn this alphabet. Most people will not want to. Neither we, nor the limited views of this group, are all that important, the future is. 
> > > You believe compound letters are evil.
> > Evil again? Are we straying into deep waters here? I submit  > > merely that there is no good reason for there to be two types  > > of compound vowels, some represented by a digraph and  > > others not. Why should there be? Is not simplicity a virtue?
> Now I happen to agree here somewhat.  I was surprised to find the  > combinations with R.  However, I accept it as part of the standard.Again, the point is not as you might think to further annoy this group, merelyto strive for a more easily understandable and acceptable form of Shavian. 
> > > First point:  Most people who know Shavian don't  > > > have any major gripes about it.  
> > You mean all several dozen of us? 
> > > It works pretty darn well, in my opinion.  
> > In mine too, but could work even more smoothly with the  > > wrinkles ironed out. Do you consider it perfect? The test  > > should be not whether you find it fin
(Message over 64 KB, truncated)

Hugh Birkenhead wrote:

> /ITan rOt:
>
>
>
> F hAv plEd a bit v trumpat bIfP, but F wuznt Ebl t tEk H tFm t bIkum
> prOfiSant, n Az V nO, V hAf t bI dedikEtad t kIp jP lips in SEp.
>
>
>
> HAt’s rFt. F’v nevD rWlI prAktist H trumpat verI kansistantlI, n Az a
> rizult mF teknIk hAznt imprMvd muc in 5 jCz. HX woz a tFm wen F woz
> gigiN on hPn 3 nFts a wIk n mF stAmina stil woznt imprMviN. but sins
> smYl bAnd JAz gigz R IzID on H cops, HAt’s wot F prifx.
>
>
>
> Fv nevD hAd H opDtVnitI t trF pDkuSan instramants. pDhAps wun v HIz dEz!
>
>
>
> mF VnivxsatI woznt verI ‘JAz-sAvI’ -- H mVzik dapRtmant OnlI hAd an
> Pkastra. F trFd plEiN trumpat in it but it woz tM muc lFk hRd wxk. HE
> wx misiN a timpanI plED sO F TYt F’d lxn Hem. F endad up plEiN timpanI
> wiH Hem fP TrI jCz.
>
>
>
> H GhAmand Pgan kan bI an RtfPm in itself, sins HX R sO mAnI wEz V kan
> set it up.
>
>
>
> V’D rFt. HX R sO menI difDant mVzikal mVdz HAt kAn bI rIkrIEtad.
> unfPcanatlI F dOnt On wun. H best F kUd afPd on a mVziSan’z buJat woz
> a diJital klOn, wic iz gUd inuf. H kantrOlz n sQndz rIpradVst R
> Fdentikal t HOz v mOst ‘JenVin’ hAmandz HO.
>
>
>
> 6 bAndz! F plE in tM, mOst v H tFm. wun iz a blMgrAs bAnd, H uHD iz
> a smYl Pkastra.
>
>
>
> je, F dOnt nO hQ igzAktlI F kIp Hem Yl gOiN. F Vst t dubal-bUk mFself
> an Yfal lot. F’v nevD plEd blMgrAs, YlHO F plE rok n rOl
> (www.oneyedcats.com) -- wot dM V plE in jP blMgrAs bAnd? hAv V got enI
> sAmpalz?
>
>
>
> /hV /b
>
F dOnt hAv enI sAmplz, but F kAn pqnt V t H websFt -
http://thebaitshopboys.com/ it hAznt ben updEtad muc, but it wil giv V a
litl infO abQt QD grMp.
if V vizit His pEJ on H sFt, http://thebaitshopboys.com/_wsn/page2.html
V wil fFnd mI on H fR rFt sFd v H pikSD, hOldiN a fidl n "wyStub" bEs.
H fidl iz mF mEn instramant.

--
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.

Well, now i have even Yahoo angry at me for being too long-winded.
But not to worry, here is the exciting conclusion to message 1542

.......................


Well before this group was created, indeed, well before there was a
Yahoo
to host it, I began in a light-hearted manner to spread the word to
anyone
and everyone that I thought could be remotely interested in the
advantages
of a more rational alphabet. I put together a little hand-lettered
booklet (no
Shavian computer fonts in those days) extolling the virtues and
explaining
the intricacies of Shavian and sent it round to newspapers, professional
journals, institutions and the like, quite a lot of them, in the hope
not that it
would be published, it was too minor an effort for that, but perhaps
to be
noticed and perhaps spark an article in response -- or at least an
expression
of interest. I thought that at least the parentage of Shaw would
ensure some
acknowledgement. The result of course was a few polite replies of the
standard variety, a few of which however were written in Shavian which
was a minor triumph of sorts, as someone had taken the time to read it.
The only positive response was from a private school, an upper-level
Montessori-type institution that brought together bright students of
modest
means and rich kids of modest ability for supposed mutual benefit. This
was not considered to be anything serious by the school authorities,
just
a spot of levity in the real business of prepping their charges for
university.

So, on an irregular basis when scheduling permitted, I gave my little
talk
off and on for several years to ever new generations of the innocent.
This
is where I acquired a little experience in the inherent difficulties
involved in
introducing unusual ideas to people who aren't inclined to entertain
any,
would prefer to be doing something else, and to whom you must convince
that there really is some value to be found in the subject presented.
This
is the reason why I persist in insisting that Shavian, if it is ever
to be taken
up by anyone other than we enthusiasts, will have to be presented in the
simplest, most unobjectionable form, possible. I also gave my talks
to the
faculty (during their lunch breaks), which was always an occasion of
great
merriment.

Attempting to present the case that an alternative alphabet is in any
way
desirable, let alone realistic, is about on par with arguing that the
Pyramids
were constructed by inter-stellar aliens. Really, you get the same
sort of
fascinated stares of disbelief and amazement that anyone would suggest
such a weird idea, let alone present it as a workable notion worthy
of some
consideration. I tried at first, in order to counter the appearance
of crackpot
oddity, to remove the suspicion that this was something I had cooked up
and to connect it with a general spirit of reform and the person of
Bernard
Shaw, noted critic, famous author, and more importantly, the man behind
"My Fair Lady", still familiar to everyone in those days.

That was a mistake. Reform of any kind is not looked upon kindly by
anyone
confident that their position in life is a result not of fortunate
circumstances
but as a natural right. As an alternative I learned to present
Shavian as a
logical (yes, I appealed to logic) culmination of the several
thousand-year-
old development (with examples) of the alphabet, one of mankind's
greatest
achievements. This approach enjoyed somewhat better success, but
suffered
in turn from being too much like regular history, something to be
accorded
respect, if not attention. When attention waned, I threw in a bit of
Rune magic,
and sad to say, this never failed to rekindle interest. The obscure
and the
mysterious trumps the mundane and useful any day. The only reason I
continued with this near futile exercise was that usually, not always
but often,
there would be one or two students who became genuinely interested, even
approaching me afterwards (not wanting to reveal their interest
openly to their
classmates, probably) for more information. It is such people to whom
hope is
to be directed. So, it's not as if the only thing I have done for
Shavian is to
harangue this group; I have made an effort, however insignificant, on
behalf
of its dissemination and use.

I apologize for these personal reminiscences of little or no
interest, except
inasmuch as they may perhaps serve as as a cautionary tale of what to
expect
when dealing with a mostly uninterested and generally skeptical public.


as ever,
dshep

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com,
--- Scott Harrison wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 4, 2006, at 14:35 , dshep wrote:
>
> > reply to message 1506 from paul vandenbrink:
> >
> >
> <SNIP>
>
> > but would use 'array' for these:
> >
> > we're wI'ar
> > you're jM'ar
> >
>
> Do not use apostrophes!
>
> --
> ·ð`•ð`'ð`ªð`` ·ð`£ð`ºð`¦ð`•ð`©ð`¯ Scott Harrison


Do not issue commands!

please,
dshep

We now have 2 parallel threads going on about the same topic, DShep vs
everyone (which is starting to bore).



DShep: It's safe to say, you've got your point across, and you must realize
nobody is bowled over, nor are they ever going to be. Go ahead and pursue
your modified Shavian, but as far as this group is concerned, can we please
leave it now?



Hugh B



_____

From: shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com [mailto:shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of dshep
Sent: 07 March 2006 08:37
To: shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [shawalphabet] re: dshep's spelling conventions



Well, now i have even Yahoo angry at me for being too long-winded.

But not to worry, here is the exciting conclusion to message 1542



.......................





Well before this group was created, indeed, well before there was a Yahoo

to host it, I began in a light-hearted manner to spread the word to anyone

and everyone that I thought could be remotely interested in the advantages

of a more rational alphabet. I put together a little hand-lettered booklet
(no

Shavian computer fonts in those days) extolling the virtues and explaining

the intricacies of Shavian and sent it round to newspapers, professional

journals, institutions and the like, quite a lot of them, in the hope not
that it

would be published, it was too minor an effort for that, but perhaps to be

noticed and perhaps spark an article in response -- or at least an
expression

of interest. I thought that at least the parentage of Shaw would ensure some


acknowledgement. The result of course was a few polite replies of the

standard variety, a few of which however were written in Shavian which

was a minor triumph of sorts, as someone had taken the time to read it.

The only positive response was from a private school, an upper-level

Montessori-type institution that brought together bright students of modest

means and rich kids of modest ability for supposed mutual benefit. This

was not considered to be anything serious by the school authorities, just

a spot of levity in the real business of prepping their charges for
university.



So, on an irregular basis when scheduling permitted, I gave my little talk

off and on for several years to ever new generations of the innocent. This

is where I acquired a little experience in the inherent difficulties
involved in

introducing unusual ideas to people who aren't inclined to entertain any,

would prefer to be doing something else, and to whom you must convince

that there really is some value to be found in the subject presented. This

is the reason why I persist in insisting that Shavian, if it is ever to be
taken

up by anyone other than we enthusiasts, will have to be presented in the

simplest, most unobjectionable form, possible. I also gave my talks to the

faculty (during their lunch breaks), which was always an occasion of great

merriment.



Attempting to present the case that an alternative alphabet is in any way

desirable, let alone realistic, is about on par with arguing that the
Pyramids

were constructed by inter-stellar aliens. Really, you get the same sort of

fascinated stares of disbelief and amazement that anyone would suggest

such a weird idea, let alone present it as a workable notion worthy of some

consideration. I tried at first, in order to counter the appearance of
crackpot

oddity, to remove the suspicion that this was something I had cooked up

and to connect it with a general spirit of reform and the person of Bernard

Shaw, noted critic, famous author, and more importantly, the man behind

"My Fair Lady", still familiar to everyone in those days.



That was a mistake. Reform of any kind is not looked upon kindly by anyone

confident that their position in life is a result not of fortunate
circumstances

but as a natural right. As an alternative I learned to present Shavian as a

logical (yes, I appealed to logic) culmination of the several thousand-year-

old development (with examples) of the alphabet, one of mankind's greatest

achievements. This approach enjoyed somewhat better success, but suffered

in turn from being too much like regular history, something to be accorded

respect, if not attention. When attention waned, I threw in a bit of Rune
magic,

and sad to say, this never failed to rekindle interest. The obscure and the

mysterious trumps the mundane and useful any day. The only reason I

continued with this near futile exercise was that usually, not always but
often,

there would be one or two students who became genuinely interested, even

approaching me afterwards (not wanting to reveal their interest openly to
their

classmates, probably) for more information. It is such people to whom hope
is

to be directed. So, it's not as if the only thing I have done for Shavian is
to

harangue this group; I have made an effort, however insignificant, on behalf


of its dissemination and use.



I apologize for these personal reminiscences of little or no interest,
except

inasmuch as they may perhaps serve as as a cautionary tale of what to expect


when dealing with a mostly uninterested and generally skeptical public.





as ever,

dshep













SPONSORED LINKS


Shaw
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Shaw+rug&w1=Shaw+rug&w2=Shaw+carpets&w3
=Corporate+culture&w4=Business+culture+of+china&w5=Shaw+flooring&w6=Shaw+flo
rist&c=6&s3&.sig=YIW_B1oY2COM27wPq8lHOw> rug

Shaw
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Shaw+carpets&w1=Shaw+rug&w2=Shaw+carpet
s&w3=Corporate+culture&w4=Business+culture+of+china&w5=Shaw+flooring&w6=Shaw
+florist&c=6&s3&.sig=i0GmmaJZ-_LYyTKfZV3A7Q> carpets

Corporate
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Corporate+culture&w1=Shaw+rug&w2=Shaw+c
arpets&w3=Corporate+culture&w4=Business+culture+of+china&w5=Shaw+flooring&w6
=Shaw+florist&c=6&s3&.sig=IJh5sOdyyouM1wglT1O6tQ> culture


Business
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Business+culture+of+china&w1=Shaw+rug&w
2=Shaw+carpets&w3=Corporate+culture&w4=Business+culture+of+china&w5=Shaw+flo
oring&w6=Shaw+florist&c=6&s3&.sig=u2pQwknmRESr-Lwdrp2YvA> culture of
china

Shaw
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Shaw+flooring&w1=Shaw+rug&w2=Shaw+carpe
ts&w3=Corporate+culture&w4=Business+culture+of+china&w5=Shaw+flooring&w6=Sha
w+florist&c=6&s3&.sig=7on4hP0fDgPAj4mBIRmqJQ> flooring

Shaw
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Shaw+florist&w1=Shaw+rug&w2=Shaw+carpet
s&w3=Corporate+culture&w4=Business+culture+of+china&w5=Shaw+flooring&w6=Shaw
+florist&c=6&s3&.sig²yWzpM8b6y1pPnsYnJAcw> florist



_____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



* Visit your group "shawalphabet
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shawalphabet> " on the web.

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
shawalphabet-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:shawalphabet-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



_____

hF /filap
TANks fP eksplEniN HAt.
F wuz OnlF in /gDmemI wuns, F wuz juN.
n didant fFnd enIwun t eksplEn TiNz lFk HAt.
it iz gUd t nO.
ragRdz, /pYl /vI.
pI. es. vEz haz 3 kyman prOnunsIESuns,
/kAnEdIan, /amDikAn n /britiS
______________atAct__________________
--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Newton, Philip"
<Philip.Newton@...> wrote:
> In words of Germanic origin, usually yes. In loan words, it can
also be > pronounced like an English "V" (for example, the German
word "Vase" starts with the same sound as the English "vase").
>
> > and the w-letter is always pronounced like an English "V".
>
> Yes, pretty much.
>
> > How would they write the w-sound?
>
> Why would they need to write that sound? How would English speakers
write a
> velar click, also a sound not found in that language's phonemic
inventory?
>
> In loan words from English, by the way, Germans represent that
sound with
> the same letter "w" that the original word in English uses -- if
they use a
> /w/ sound in pronouncing the word, a sound not native to German.
They may
> also opt to pronounce it with a /v/ instead, saying "Vashington"
for example
> even when writing it "Washington"; as another example, "Wellness"
may be
> pronounced both "wellness" or "vellness" depending on the speaker
and the
> situation.
>
> To generalise, I'd say that (a) younger and (b) more educated
people (which
> includes having had mandatory English lessons in school) would be
more
> likely to pronounce a /w/ in such loan words while older people are
more
> likely to pronounce /v/.
>
> Cheers,
> Philip
>

hF /hV
wut hApand? pDhAps V hAv nyt red mF lAst fV mesaJaz.
HX R nyt Just 2 sepDAt Tredz gOiN yn n yn abQt H sEm typik.
F hAv sajestad a pysabal kympramiz.

it YlwEz hApanz. H ekstrIm rIAkSanXIz n H ekstrIm revalMSunXIz
get lQdD n lQdD, n Hen H vqs v mydDESun gets drQnd Qt.
iz enIwun intDestad in Just getiN yn wiT H jyb?
evrI jyb, evrI HiN wxT dMiN hAz its bPiN bits. wI Just hav t
kIp TiNz gOiN, if wI wAnt t akympliS QD ybJektiv.

ragRdz, /pYl /vI
pI. es. F Am bOld OvD HAt pIpal kIp tripiN OvD His inkonsistI
in /SYvIan dezFn, yC AftD yC, n V dO nyt konsidD it signifakent.
pDhAps V wil rEkynsidD?
________________atAct_____________________________________________

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Hugh Birkenhead" <mixsynth@...>
wrote:
>
> We now have 2 parallel threads going on about the same topic, DShep vs
> everyone (which is starting to bore).

> DShep: It's safe to say, you've got your point across, and you must
realize
> nobody is bowled over, nor are they ever going to be. Go ahead and
pursue
> your modified Shavian, but as far as this group is concerned, can we
please
> leave it now?