Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

Hi Steve

I don't know what I.T.A, you are talking about.
I presume it means Initial Teaching Alphabet.
But it doesn't share any resemblence to the Real Pitman Initial
Teaching Alphabet, as in the Real ITA, each letter represents to a
single phoneme.
Your ITA has Diagraphs.
The Pitman Initial Teaching Alphabet (i.t.a.) was invented by Sir
James Pitman, grandson of the inventor of Pitman shorthand around the
same time as the Shavian Alphabet. It has been used in a number of
British school since 1961 and soon spread to the USA and Australia.
I am surprised you are not familar with it. It is very well designed
and uses 44 letters, including all of the Roman letters except Q and
X.
You can take a look at it at
http://www.omniglot.com/writing/ita.htm
The letters are obvious and easy to use.
I don't have any trouble understanding it at all!
The only problem that I note, is that it has no letter for the Schwa
sound. I suppose you could use X to represent the SChwa sound.
Tell if it meets your requirements? Why re-invent the Wheel.
{Rhetorical)

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. Perhaps you meant to post your note at the Simplified Spelling
site? ______________________attached_____________________________

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetta@a... wrote:
> Sound-Spellers:
> Does anyone here have any trouble figuring out New Spelling and the
i/t/a?
> It is quite similar to many of the orthographies posted on
Saundspel.
> The authors of these new alpabets often say they were not
influenced by New
> Spelling. This is probably true since except for a few sound
signs - the basic
> code is based on the most frequent spelling patterns in written
English. It
> is a consensus alphabet according to a 1980 study by Traeger.
>
> I would like to add at least 3 other ways to spell the vowels and 1
other way
> to spell consonants in the chart. Along with the frequencies. Tom
could
> calculate this for each sound sign except schwa. See
Polyvalence /u:/ 18 ways
> The initial teaching alphabet or i/t/a
> The i/t/a is based on the consensus alphabet for English. By using
ligatures
> on the key caps, it manages to retain the look of a digrahic code
with
> uni-graphs.
> A ae-Mae, a-at
> E ee-eve, e-end
> I ie-eye, i-it /aI/
> O oe-oat, o-odd
> au au-taut, au-cost, moss
> a aa-ah, ar-are
> U uu-boot, u-up, ue-feud
> oo-foot (fwt)
> ur ur-urge, *er-surfer
> oi oi-oyster,
> ou ou-out
>
> wh when
> dh then th thin
> ng ng-king Traeger, 1980
> SB: I think the consensus is conditioned by familiarity with New
Spelling.
> In 1881, E. Jones published in the Spelling Experimenter a slightly
different
> set of choices: A vowel not followed by a consonant has its long or
name sound.
> Jones' scheme was similar to ALC Soundspel: open vowels ay e y o u
oy aw ow
>
> The i/t/a studies in the 1960's showed that just transcribing the
basal
> reader accelerated literacy in the phonemic code. i/t/a students
completed 4
> transcribed readers twice as fast as students in the control
group. The basal
> reader approach was designed to teach word-signs not sound-signs.
It would not be
> unexpected that as much as 40% of the students never over-learned
the
> sound-signs. While students learned word patterns, as much as 40%
of the i/t/a
> students never over-learned the i/t/a sound signs.
>
> Any simple code can be over-learned in 3 months and with this
foundation
> the more difficult polyvalent code can be learned quicker. ...
After one year
> in the accelerated WTR program, the students in one study were
reading at a
> 3rd grade level. The bicodal approach allowed them to skip 2 years
of
> schooling.
> New pages on the i/t/a at www.foolswisdom.com:
> ita-1 i/t/a-evaluation ita-radio

Paul,

Thank you for your comments.

Did you get a chance to view the i/t/a web pages on foolswisdom?
You mention http://www.omniglot.com/writing/ita.htm but not
www.foolswisdom.com/ita1.htm
There is a transcript of the BBC radio program on the i/t/a at
http://www.foolswisdom.com/users/sbett/ita-radio.htm

I wonder if we could get a radio program produced on the Shaw alphabet?

The reason for introducing the i/t/a in the Shavian discussion group was to
1. illustrate another attempt to represent English speech and
2. to generate some ideas on how to get the word out and recruit more users.

Altho Shaw himself was excellent at public relations and promotion. There has
been no one of his stature pushing Shavian and keeping it in the public eye.

There were 1000's affected by the i/t/a so it made sense to have a 40th
anniversary show. My i/t/a pages have been up since 1998 and I usually get one
letter a month from people who started to read with the i/t/a.

This is the real Pitman i/t/a or as Sir James originally called it augmented
Roman.


I am not sure how many graphics came through.

Each symbol corresponds to a phoneme as you say
but some of the sound signs are ligatured digraphs.

There was no schwa in the system but there was a symbol that merged /3r/ and
/@r/.

This is something new since most of the other characters can be found in New
Spelling. 3 for zh is also new. New Spelling was the official house style
for the Spelling Society for a few years in the early 1900's.

pvandenbrink@... wrote:
Hi Steve

I don't know what i.t.a. you are talking about.
I presume it means Initial Teaching Alphabet.
But it doesn't share any resemblence to the Real Pitman Initial
Teaching Alphabet, as in the Real ITA, each letter represents to a
single phoneme. Your ITA has Diagraphs.
If it did it was because I was trying to simulate the i/t/a with New Spelling.
Since there is no digital font for the i/t/a, you have to view it as a
graphic.

Paul wrote: I am surprised you are not familar with it. It is very well
designed
and uses 44 letters, including all of the Roman letters except Q and

The letters are obvious and easy to use.
I don't have any trouble understanding it at all!
The only problem that I note, is that it has no letter for the Schwa
sound. I suppose you could use X to represent the Schwa sound.
Tell if it meets your requirements? Why re-invent the Wheel. {Rhetorical)

Regards, Paul V.


--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetta@a... wrote:
> Sound-Spellers:
> Does anyone here have any trouble figuring out New Spelling and the
i/t/a?

> The i/t/a is based on the consensus alphabet for English. By using
ligatures on the key caps, it manages to retain the look of a digrahic code
with uni-graphs.

[This text was a caption for a graphic which illustrated the i/t/a symbols]

> A ae-Mae, a-at [æ] This can be displayed as a ligatured unigraph, the
others can't
> E ee-eve, e-end
> I ie-eye, i-it /aI/
> O oe-oat, o-odd
> au au-taut, au-cost, moss
> a aa-ah, ar-are
> U uu-boot, u-up, ue-feud
> oo-foot (fwt)
> ur ur-urge, *er-surfer
> oi oi-oyster,
> ou ou-out
>
> wh when
> dh then th thin
> ng ng-king Traeger, 1980
> SB: I think the consensus is conditioned by familiarity with New
Spelling.
> In 1881, E. Jones published in the Spelling Experimenter a slightly
different
> set of choices: A vowel not followed by a consonant has its long or
name sound.
> Jones' scheme was similar to ALC Soundspel: open vowels ay e y o u
oy aw ow
>
> The i/t/a studies in the 1960's showed that just transcribing the
basal
> reader accelerated literacy in the phonemic code. i/t/a students
completed 4
> transcribed readers twice as fast as students in the control
group. The basal
> reader approach was designed to teach word-signs not sound-signs.
It would not be
> unexpected that as much as 40% of the students never over-learned
the
> sound-signs. While students learned word patterns, as much as 40%
of the i/t/a
> students never over-learned the i/t/a sound signs.
>
> Any simple code can be over-learned in 3 months and with this
foundation
> the more difficult polyvalent code can be learned quicker. ...
After one year
> in the accelerated WTR program, the students in one study were
reading at a
> 3rd grade level. The bicodal approach allowed them to skip 2 years
of
> schooling.
> New pages on the i/t/a at www.foolswisdom.com:
> ita-1 i/t/a-evaluation ita-radio

pmf-princess.gif

PMF page - www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett/pictography.htm

I have cleaned up the PMF transcription and I would like to have some
feedback on it.
Tell me what you like and dislike about it.

The basis of the design is "similar shapes for similar sounds".
Notice the closeness of the short i shape and the schwa shape.
The idea is that even if someone makes a phonemic spelling mistake, it would
not impact the ability to recognize the word.

1. Can this be read without a key?
Many of the shapes are Read inspired but the sound assignments are
different.
Voiced unvoiced pairs are usually inverted [e.g. bp] rather than rotated
as in Shavian.
The relationship between Shavian and Roman was purposely obscured.
The PMF design attempts to retain historical shapes. In the case of g
and k/c
the < is a Roman shape but its mate > is not. You have to go back to
Etruscan and
Punic and early Greek to find a parallel gamma form.

2. Phonology issues: w = \ but the transcription uses /wU&ns/ rather than
/wVns/.
Obviously the rationale for this is to improve word recognition. \^rd
vs. \v`rd
3 and & and (3` &` r ) are very close in shape. &&r=3r

3. Wordsigns: D for D& (the), &v ligature for uv (of).

4. Typographical issues: The t and f might be improved.

5. Symbols: The reassignment of the c shape might be confusing to TO adepts.
Read added a tail on the c which made it look like a rotated 5 to
distinguish it.
If c for /ä/ can be accepted then it is easy to see how a stacked ci
represents /aI/
The mirrored c is the IPA <awe> symbol. Mirrored c+i = /oi/.

Hi Steve

Glad to know that we are talking about the same Pitman I.T.A.
Interesting to see that there was a competing Phonetic Alphabet
developed about the same time as Shavian.

But why the Heck do you still use Diagraphs to write it. Isn't there
a font with each of the 44 characters mapped to a single key?
Some of the letters obviously need some work. Ligatured digraphs are
only good as a work around. By now you should have som decent
replacement characters. The Character Eel in ITA is a good example
of what a real letter should look like.
Aep is a good letter, but it could be made a more symetric.
Surfer needs to be revisited.
All this could be addressed with a new font.
You could have used pretty much the same mapping as the Shavian
Alphabet.

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. Surfer as a symbol that merged /3r/ and
> /@r/ is a good idea but really, you need a Schwa Letter..

_______________attached________________

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetta@a... wrote:
> Paul,
>
> Thank you for your comments.
>
> Did you get a chance to view the i/t/a web pages on foolswisdom?
> You mention http://www.omniglot.com/writing/ita.htm but not
> www.foolswisdom.com/ita1.htm
> There is a transcript of the BBC radio program on the i/t/a at
> http://www.foolswisdom.com/users/sbett/ita-radio.htm
>
> I wonder if we could get a radio program produced on the Shaw
alphabet?
>
> The reason for introducing the i/t/a in the Shavian discussion
group was to
> 1. illustrate another attempt to represent English speech and
> 2. to generate some ideas on how to get the word out and recruit
more users.
>
> Altho Shaw himself was excellent at public relations and promotion.
There has
> been no one of his stature pushing Shavian and keeping it in the
public eye.
>
> There were 1000's affected by the i/t/a so it made sense to have a
40th
> anniversary show. My i/t/a pages have been up since 1998 and I
usually get one
> letter a month from people who started to read with the i/t/a.
>
> This is the real Pitman i/t/a or as Sir James originally called it
augmented
> Roman.
>
>
> I am not sure how many graphics came through.
>
> Each symbol corresponds to a phoneme as you say
> but some of the sound signs are ligatured digraphs.
>
> There was no schwa in the system but there was a symbol that
merged /3r/ and
> /@r/.
>
> This is something new since most of the other characters can be
found in New
> Spelling. 3 for zh is also new. New Spelling was the official
house style
> for the Spelling Society for a few years in the early 1900's.
>
> pvandenbrink@s... wrote:
>> I don't know what i.t.a. you are talking about.
> I presume it means Initial Teaching Alphabet.
> But it doesn't share any resemblence to the Real Pitman Initial
> Teaching Alphabet, as in the Real ITA, each letter represents to a
> single phoneme. Your ITA has Diagraphs.
> If it did it was because I was trying to simulate the i/t/a with
New Spelling.
> Since there is no digital font for the i/t/a, you have to view it
as a
> graphic.
>
> Paul wrote: I am surprised you are not familar with it. It is very
well
> designed
> and uses 44 letters, including all of the Roman letters except Q
and
>
> The letters are obvious and easy to use.
> I don't have any trouble understanding it at all!
> The only problem that I note, is that it has no letter for the
Schwa
> sound. I suppose you could use X to represent the Schwa sound.

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink"
<pvandenbrink@s...> wrote:


> P.S. I don't think it is necessary to provide an alternate letter
> for hung as the other Nasal Letters are not Deep letters, even
> tho they do represent Voiced sounds. Nasals are usually Short
> letters, like the Vowels.


They can easily be made to conform through the ridiculously
simple expedient of adding descenders to the tail of the 'm'
letter and to the head of the 'n'. When writing by hand only
a flick of the wrist is required and presto — deep letters. I've
found them easier to write than the original form. For that
matter one could do the same to the 'l' and 'r' (though best
to leave the compounds alone) and in this way one could
effortlessly distinguish in each and every word bone from muscle.

regards,
dshep

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com,
"Hugh Birkenhead" <mixsynth@f...> wrote:

> dshep

> I'm not sure why you attach so much value to swapping two
> letters merely for consistency ...

Because the better it is the more appeal it will have to anyone
otherwise less than impressed, and unenthusiastic about extending
any effort at all towards something so utopian (and I would swap
'err' and 'air' as well).

> only a linguist (and a petty one at that) would care for.

Dealing with the Shaw alphabet involves linguistics,
like it or not.

> I'm quite sure most people new to Shavian don't care
> that deeps are mostly voiced and talls are mostly unvoiced
> – they just want to know what symbol equates to what
> sound in English. Your comment suggesting greater
> accessibility as a result of such a change makes no sense,
> in my view.

Then why bother with Shavian? There are simpler alternatives
using familiar letters or modifications thereof, Pitman's Initial
Teaching Alphabet, for one. And what kind of system is it where
symbols are 'mostly' one thing or the other, eh?

> As for criticism of Shavian: what improvement to this situation
> of widespread skepticism would be made by us, an admittedly
> small band of 'enthusiasts', squabbling amongst ourselves about
> such fundamental concerns as what letters there are in the alphabet
> and which 180 degree orientation they have?

Because if we don't, others, less kindly disposed, will, and in a
dismissive manner.

> How do we even HOPE to take it any further if we still can't just
> accept that Shavian, while not perfect, is a massive
> improvement from what we have now, and push it FORWARD?

Because we shall certainly fail to reach a wider audience (assuming
this is thought worthwhile) unless the Shaw alphabet can be put
in such a form that will overcome easy criticism, expected scepticism,
and yes, general amusement — the noble but misguided efforts of
cranks. Think about it — changing the alphabet, what a ridiculous
idea. I repeat: make the public an offer it would be unreasonable to
refuse (because it is logical, and logic requires, sorry,
consistency).


> We have been faced with this argument SO many times, and every
> time it's merely because all we have to do, it seems, is try to
> fiddle with the alphabet rather than actually using it. When's the
> last time any of us here actually wrote anything in Shavian?


Well, I would have put my observations in Shawscript except that then
they wouldn't have annoyed anyone.


> The original brief of the Shavian eGroup was: conversation IN and
> ABOUT the Shaw Alphabet. For years we have seen plenty of 'about'
> but absolutely no 'in'. We ought to ask ourselves, what's the point
> in being here at all if the alphabet remains a subject for analysis
> and not a tool of communication?

The better it is, the easier it will be to use. I repeat, the best
allies we could have for the propagation of the Shaw alphabet
are secondary and high-school English teachers, but they will
be loath to mention it in their classes as long as it contains a
built-in contradiction, a flaw that any alert pupil will notice
and happily point out for the amusement of his mates, thus
undermining any prospect of eliciting genuine interest and
general acceptance by a larger public. Convice the sceptics first,
and other will follow.

> Is this group going to continue to be one big circular argument?
>
> Hugh B
>

I don't see any circularity, just blank refusal to examine the inner
structure of the Shaw alphabet, and recognize it for what it is..

with regards,
dshep

Hi Hugh & dshep

I think these sugggestions for change are getting out of hand.
I would only be interested in changes, that simplify the writing of
English in the Shaw Alphabet.
Dshep, what you are talking about, descenders, would spoil the look
of a whole group of Shaw Letters.
Also the Nasal and Liquid Letters quite properly make up a distinct
category of sounds that quite rightly and logically for that matter
belong in the Short Category.
The Short Category includes all the Vowel sounds, but also those
Consonant sounds, which can act without a Vowel. Yew, Loll, Nun, Mem,
Array and other Liquid Letters, can stand on their own as Syllabic
Consonants. Hung, although a Nasal, is not used that way in English,
except maybe in some African place names.It probably could be used as
a Syllabic Consonant.

I realize that you find it annoying, that there is this fly in the
ointment,
in an otherwise perfect system, which can't be easily corrected.
But Hey, a lot of people have made that observation.
And az I have pointed out, this pair of letters Hung and Ha-Ha don't
represent related sounds, like all the other Letter Pairs.
The are both left-overs that just got thrown together,
and as such the Voiced/Unvoiced relationship doesn't make sense
anyway.

Regards, Paul V.


--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "dshepx" <dshep@g...> wrote:
>
> --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com,
> "Hugh Birkenhead" <mixsynth@f...> wrote:
>
> > dshep
>
> > I'm not sure why you attach so much value to swapping two
> > letters merely for consistency ...
>
> Because the better it is the more appeal it will have to anyone
> otherwise less than impressed, and unenthusiastic about extending
> any effort at all towards something so utopian (and I would swap
> 'err' and 'air' as well).
>
> > only a linguist (and a petty one at that) would care for.
>
> Dealing with the Shaw alphabet involves linguistics,
> like it or not.
>
> > I'm quite sure most people new to Shavian don't care
> > that deeps are mostly voiced and talls are mostly unvoiced
> > – they just want to know what symbol equates to what
> > sound in English. Your comment suggesting greater
> > accessibility as a result of such a change makes no sense,
> > in my view.
>
> Then why bother with Shavian? There are simpler alternatives
> using familiar letters or modifications thereof, Pitman's Initial
> Teaching Alphabet, for one. And what kind of system is it where
> symbols are 'mostly' one thing or the other, eh?
>
> > As for criticism of Shavian: what improvement to this situation
> > of widespread skepticism would be made by us, an admittedly
> > small band of 'enthusiasts', squabbling amongst ourselves about
> > such fundamental concerns as what letters there are in the
alphabet
> > and which 180 degree orientation they have?
>
> Because if we don't, others, less kindly disposed, will, and in a
> dismissive manner.
>
> > How do we even HOPE to take it any further if we still can't just
> > accept that Shavian, while not perfect, is a massive
> > improvement from what we have now, and push it FORWARD?
>
> Because we shall certainly fail to reach a wider audience (assuming
> this is thought worthwhile) unless the Shaw alphabet can be put
> in such a form that will overcome easy criticism, expected
scepticism,
> and yes, general amusement — the noble but misguided efforts of
> cranks. Think about it — changing the alphabet, what a ridiculous
> idea. I repeat: make the public an offer it would be unreasonable to
> refuse (because it is logical, and logic requires, sorry,
> consistency).
>
>
> > We have been faced with this argument SO many times, and every
> > time it's merely because all we have to do, it seems, is try to
> > fiddle with the alphabet rather than actually using it. When's
the
> > last time any of us here actually wrote anything in Shavian?
>
>
> Well, I would have put my observations in Shawscript except that
then
> they wouldn't have annoyed anyone.
>
>
> > The original brief of the Shavian eGroup was: conversation IN and
> > ABOUT the Shaw Alphabet. For years we have seen plenty of 'about'
> > but absolutely no 'in'. We ought to ask ourselves, what's the
point
> > in being here at all if the alphabet remains a subject for
analysis
> > and not a tool of communication?
>
> The better it is, the easier it will be to use. I repeat, the best
> allies we could have for the propagation of the Shaw alphabet
> are secondary and high-school English teachers, but they will
> be loath to mention it in their classes as long as it contains a
> built-in contradiction, a flaw that any alert pupil will notice
> and happily point out for the amusement of his mates, thus
> undermining any prospect of eliciting genuine interest and
> general acceptance by a larger public. Convice the sceptics first,
> and other will follow.
>
> > Is this group going to continue to be one big circular argument?
> >
> > Hugh B
> >
>
> I don't see any circularity, just blank refusal to examine the inner
> structure of the Shaw alphabet, and recognize it for what it is..
>
> with regards,
> dshep

Paul,

No there is not digital font that maps each character to a single key.

The reason for using digraphs is that this is a transitional alphabet.
I think this is pretty well explained at
www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett/ita1.htm

You seem to like the EE diagraph but dislike others.

I too think that any highly phonemic alphabet should have a unique symbol for
schwa.
but I think I understand why Pitman did not want one.

Hi Steve

Glad to know that we are talking about the same Pitman I.T.A.
Interesting to see that there was a competing Phonetic Alphabet
developed about the same time as Shavian.

But why the Heck do you still use Diagraphs to write it. Isn't there
a font with each of the 44 characters mapped to a single key?
Some of the letters obviously need some work. Ligatured digraphs are
only good as a work around. By now you should have som decent
replacement characters. The Character Eel in ITA is a good example
of what a real letter should look like.
Aep is a good letter, but it could be made a more symetric.
Surfer needs to be revisited.
All this could be addressed with a new font.
You could have used pretty much the same mapping as the Shavian
Alphabet.

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. Surfer as a symbol that merged /3r/ and
> /@r/ is a good idea but really, you need a Schwa Letter..

_______________attached________________

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetta@a... wrote:
> Paul,
>
> Thank you for your comments.
>
> Did you get a chance to view the i/t/a web pages on foolswisdom?
> You mention http://www.omniglot.com/writing/ita.htm but not
> www.foolswisdom.com/ita1.htm
> There is a transcript of the BBC radio program on the i/t/a at
> http://www.foolswisdom.com/users/sbett/ita-radio.htm
>
> I wonder if we could get a radio program produced on the Shaw
alphabet?
>
> The reason for introducing the i/t/a in the Shavian discussion
group was to
> 1. illustrate another attempt to represent English speech and
> 2. to generate some ideas on how to get the word out and recruit
more users.
>
> Altho Shaw himself was excellent at public relations and promotion.
There has
> been no one of his stature pushing Shavian and keeping it in the
public eye.
>
> There were 1000's affected by the i/t/a so it made sense to have a
40th
> anniversary show. My i/t/a pages have been up since 1998 and I
usually get one
> letter a month from people who started to read with the i/t/a.
>
> This is the real Pitman i/t/a or as Sir James originally called it
augmented
> Roman.
>
>

Hi Steve
I really don't understand the idea of a transitional alphabet.
It is like you are trying to have your cake and eat it too.
I.T.A. needs a digital font that maps each character to a single key.

Otherwise, there is no comparison to the Shaviaan Alphabet.

By the way, you are incorrect.
I do not like the EE diagraph and I do dislike the other diagraphs.
I dislike all Diagraphs. However the Diagraphs for Aep and Eel, have
developed into quite respectable looking letters. If you look, you
will see what I mean.

As for the Schwa sound, if you didn't want to represent it with the
defunct x letter, why not just indicate a Schwa with an period.
Thats no more confusing than using a forward Slash as part of the
letter for the Surfer sound. By the Example on your site were quite
clear, and ITA definately was the best of the 3 alphabets that you
displayed.

Regards, Paul V.





--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetta@a... wrote:
> Paul,
>
> No there is not digital font that maps each character to a single
key.
>
> The reason for using digraphs is that this is a transitional
alphabet.
> I think this is pretty well explained at
> www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett/ita1.htm
>
> You seem to like the EE diagraph but dislike others.
>
> I too think that any highly phonemic alphabet should have a unique
symbol for
> schwa.
> but I think I understand why Pitman did not want one.
>
> Hi Steve
>
> Glad to know that we are talking about the same Pitman I.T.A.
> Interesting to see that there was a competing Phonetic Alphabet
> developed about the same time as Shavian.
>
> But why the Heck do you still use Diagraphs to write it. Isn't
there
> a font with each of the 44 characters mapped to a single key?
> Some of the letters obviously need some work. Ligatured digraphs
are
> only good as a work around. By now you should have som decent
> replacement characters. The Character Eel in ITA is a good example
> of what a real letter should look like.
> Aep is a good letter, but it could be made a more symetric.
> Surfer needs to be revisited.
> All this could be addressed with a new font.
> You could have used pretty much the same mapping as the Shavian
> Alphabet.
>
> Regards, Paul V.
>
> P.S. Surfer as a symbol that merged /3r/ and
> > /@r/ is a good idea but really, you need a Schwa Letter..
>
> _______________attached________________
>
> --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetta@a... wrote:
> > Paul,
> >
> > Thank you for your comments.
> >
> > Did you get a chance to view the i/t/a web pages on
foolswisdom?
> > You mention http://www.omniglot.com/writing/ita.htm but not
> > www.foolswisdom.com/ita1.htm
> > There is a transcript of the BBC radio program on the i/t/a at
> > http://www.foolswisdom.com/users/sbett/ita-radio.htm
> >
> > I wonder if we could get a radio program produced on the Shaw
> alphabet?
> >
> > The reason for introducing the i/t/a in the Shavian discussion
> group was to
> > 1. illustrate another attempt to represent English speech and
> > 2. to generate some ideas on how to get the word out and recruit
> more users.
> >
> > Altho Shaw himself was excellent at public relations and
promotion.
> There has
> > been no one of his stature pushing Shavian and keeping it in the
> public eye.
> >
> > There were 1000's affected by the i/t/a so it made sense to have
a
> 40th
> > anniversary show. My i/t/a pages have been up since 1998 and I
> usually get one
> > letter a month from people who started to read with the i/t/a.
> >
> > This is the real Pitman i/t/a or as Sir James originally called
it
> augmented
> > Roman.
> >
> >

Paul,

My comments are inserted below:

PV: I really don't understand the idea of a transitional alphabet.
It is like you are trying to have your cake and eat it too.
I.T.A. needs a digital font that maps each character to a single key.

Otherwise, there is no comparison to the Shavian Alphabet.

SB: The i/t/a represents most phonemes. The schwa is an exception to the
rule.
You seem to be disturbed by the shape of the letters. Some look like
ligatured digraphs.

A transitional alphabet is a regularized writing system designed to teach the
traditional one.
See the bicodal approach for the rationale of starting first with an easy
code.
www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett/bicodal.htm

PV: By the way, you are incorrect.
I do not like the EE diagraph and I do dislike the other diagraphs.
I dislike all Diagraphs. However the Diagraphs for Aep and Eel, have
developed into quite respectable looking letters. If you look, you
will see what I mean.

SB: I was trying to paraphrase your remarks. Evidently what you really
wanted to say was that you dislike the letterforms for EE and AE less than the
other digraphic unigraphs.

The i/t/a digraphs are not true digraphs any more than æ is a digraph.
They are just complicated letterforms. They represent what would be on the
keycaps if there was an i/t/a typewriter. Complicated letterforms are not
optimized for handwriting.

PV: As for the Schwa sound, if you didn't want to represent it with the
defunct x letter, why not just indicate a Schwa with an period.

SB: I don't feel that I have the right to make changes in someone else's
scheme without calling the result something else. Here are some

1. ITA: An inishul teeching alfubet mæks thu task uv lerning tw reed eezeer
and mor enjoiubul [simulated i/t/a] mostly schwa-u

2. TS: An inishul teeching alfubet maeks thu task uv lerning tue reed
eezeeyer and mor enjjoiubul. [truespel converter:
www.foreignword.com/dictionary/truespel/transpel.htm ]

3. SS: An inishal tieching alfabet meiks the task uv lurning tu ried iezier
and mor enjoyabl. Spanglish shaw-a

4. Fansi: An inishàl téhing alfàbet máks ð [the] task ûv lûrning tu réd
ézièr and mor ìnjoyàbl.

5. UNI: .an iniScl tEKiN alfubet mAks Du task uv lcrning tU rEd EzEcr and mOr
injQubul

6. EN: .qn iniSal tECiN qlfabet mAks Da task uv lurning tw rEd Ezyar qnd mor
enjoyabl

7. SRA: An inishul téching alfubet máks thu task uv lurning tu réd éziur and
mor injoiubul.

By the Example on your site were quite clear, and ITA definately was the best
of the 3 alphabets that you displayed.

SB: I am surprised that you like the i/t/a better than the IPA.


--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetta@a... wrote:
> Paul,

> No there is not digital font that maps each character to a single key.

> The reason for using digraphs is that this is a transitional alphabet.
> I think this is pretty well explained at
> www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett/ita1.htm