Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

Hi Steve

You said:
"They all believed that English should be written as it is spoken
and that moving to a more phonemic representation of the dominant
dialect would reduce the burden on children, accelerate literacy,
and increase the reading and writing abilities of the masses."

Obviously, they also believed in retaining the Roman Alphabet, other
wise they would be using the Shavian Alphabet by now.
Did they ever fully support the Pitman I.T.A., which is the best
other phonemic representation.

I think they have the misconception that simple has to be smaller.

Regards, Paul V.

_______________________attached____________________






--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetta@a... wrote:
> DSCHP: (I would like to avoid the 'ah' and
> 'awe' letters as well, as they are no better, but here I have no
> choice while using the existing fonts).
>
> This omission also allows
> me to use æ+r for air which is the way I pronounce that word
> and others like it anyway (but e+r for words like 'where').
> Is this the marry-merry distinction? arr=air /ær/, err= for /Er/
where error
> /Er@`/
>
> DSCHP: I also add oh+r, which I distinguish from o+r (= aw+r), as
in
> the contrast four/for. In America this distinction is maintained
> by the American Heritage dictionaries and the larger editions
> of Webster's, but abandoned in Albion, and in the American
> versions of British dictionaries (Oxford, Longman', Chalmers
> etc). I excuse this blatant hubris on the grounds that both
> Shaw himself and the designated model his alphabet was to
> have been patterned after, HRH George V (and George VI as
> well), also maintained this range of diversity, though I do so
> without the latter's dignified gravity and the former's delightful
lilt.
>
> SB: Shaw believed that the King's English was the dialect to be
represented by
> the writing system. In other countries, it was common to use the
dialect
> of court as the model for speech and the writing system. For some
reason,
> this never happened in England - the writing system was never
adjusted to
> represent the way English was spoken by the king.
>
> One can say that between 1200 and 1500, English was not the
dominant language
> of court. However, by the time the Royal Society was formed,
1611, there was
> a King's English and a court dialect that could have been
selected.
> Professor J. C. Wells of Cambridge, responsible for the
> SAMPA pages, and pronunciation editor for either the Chalmers'
> or Longman's dictionaries, can't remember which, refers to this
> choice of vowel spread as old-fashioned. So be it.
> J.C. Wells is the former chairman of the Linguistics department at
University
> College, London. He is the author of some of the Longman
Dictionaries and
> Pronunciation Guides.
>
> Like his predecessors at the UCL, Daniel Jones and Gimson, who
were former
> chairs of the Linguistics department, Wells is also the President
of the
> Simplified Spelling Society.
>
> Past Presidents of the Spelling Society include the Editor of the
Oxford
> English Dictionary and Sir James Pitman. They all believed that
English should be
> written as it is spoken and that moving to a more phonemic
representation of
> the dominant dialect would reduce the burden on children,
accelerate literacy,
> and increase the reading and writing abilities of the masses.

I didn't say I did it... besides, there ARE American dics out there.

--Star

--- paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink@...> wrote:

>
> Hi Star
> There is a lot of drudgery involved in making up even a small
> English dictionary.
> You need to be an obsessive Englishman or Scotswoman to complete one.
> Out damm Spot.
>
> Regards, Paul V.
>
> --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, Star Raven
> <celestraof12worlds@y...> wrote:
> > It is people in my family who are responsible for the Chambers
> > dictionary... small world, eh?
> >
> > --Star
> >
> > --- dshepx <dshep@g...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "dshepx" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ..................................................
> > > > ..................................................
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Professor J. C. Wells of Cambridge, responsible for
> the
> > > > SAMPA pages, and pronunciation editor for either the
> > > > Chalmers' or Longman's dictionaries, can't remember
> > > > which, refers to this choice of vowel spread as old-
> > > > fashioned. So be it.
> > >
> > >
> > > Correction:
> > >
> > > Chambers, not Chalmers. Once published by Edinburgh
> > > University (with whom it may still be affiliated) to rival
> > > the Oxford dictionaries. Perhaps a guide to Northern
> > > English?
> > >
> > > Professor J. C. Wells is with University College London
> > > not Cambridge, but is the author (at least one of them)
> > > of SAMPA (the Speech Assessment Methods Phonetic
> > > Alphabet), a project designed to reproduce all the sounds
> > > found in modern European languages, a EU sort of thing,
> > > using ordinary typewriter keys � not pretty, but supposedly
> > > precise.
> > >
> > > dshep
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ====> > http://www.livejournal.com/users/wodentoad
> >
> > Numfar! Do the Dance of Joy!
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
> > http://my.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>


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

Numfar! Do the Dance of Joy!



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

Hi Star

A good Dictionary or Thesaurus generally takes a few generations of
drudgery to complete. So if it is a family project, the family
members can take credit.

As for American Dictionaries,
I like the Aamerican Heritage.
Websters seems pretty authoritative.
Any others that compare with the great British Dictionaries?
Penguin, Oxford and Cambridge

Regards, paul V.
_____________________________________attached_____________________

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, Star Raven
<celestraof12worlds@y...> wrote:
> I didn't say I did it... besides, there ARE American dics out
there.

I agree with Steve's observation. Surely you should make 'yea' a deep
character also, in the name of consistency? This would also mean you would
have to adjust 'yew' to be a deep character - or surely, make it a short
one, so that it is in line with all the other vowel symbols?



Sure, there are some things I think are silly about Shavian - my only major
gripe is the 'err'/'air' reversal which is clearly an error and can easily
be spotted by linguistic novices and experts alike. Despite this glitch I do
not believe it serious enough to warrant making a parallel alphabet to
Shavian with only two letters altered. As for the 'hung'/'haha' dispute, I
simply do not accept there was any error made at all.



The solution to this is obvious, in my mind: if one finds Shavian's
inconsistencies too much to work with, there is already an alternative: it's
called Quikscript.



Hugh B



_____

From: stbetta@... [mailto:stbetta@...]
Sent: 11 December 2004 07:19
To: shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [shawalphabet] Re: Changes in the Shavian Alphabet



dshep@... writes:

> no amount of diversion can alter the fundamental and
> obvious fact that the sound represented by the letter
> 'h' is unvoiced, that by 'ng' is voiced, and there is no
> good reason why they should be displayed incorrectly.
> Is there? Why be deliberately wrong? Makes no sense.





The last two tall characters are not unvoiced.
The last deep characters is not voiced.
The only thing that can be changed is the sound assignment.








Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



ADVERTISEMENT

<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG9e9dscn/M)5196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr
oups/S05136382:HM/EXP02835927/A!28215/R=0/SIGse96mf6/*http:/compa
nion.yahoo.com> click here



<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M)5196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S:HM/A!28215/randP1475248>



_____

Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shawalphabet/

* 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.

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, Star Raven wrote:


> It is people in my family who are responsible for the
> Chambers dictionary... small world, eh?
>
> -- Star



I love dictionaries. I hope your family connections have fostered
a similar affection in you.

dshep

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "dshepx" wrote:



> Imagine his delight at having made the English do
> something they hadn't planned on, were conscious
> of, or would admit to doing — a minor triumph.
> Now, this may not actually be a true story, but it is
> I think too good not to be.



And now the Americans as well, who had the cheek to
revolt against his grandson.


dshep

I believe I mis-spelled Tao last time, at least to
judge from the following passage from "The Tao
of Pooh", a charming little book by Benjamin Hoff.

"Nwots HAt jUar rFtih? Askt /pM, klFmbih ontM Ha
rFtih tEbal.

"Ha dQ ov /pM" F raplFd.

Ha NQ ov /pM? Askt /pM, smuJih wun ov Ha wurdz
F NAd Just ritan.

"Ha dQ ov /pM," F raplFd, pOkih Niz pY awE wiH mF
pensil.

"it sImz mOr lFk Ha Q! ov /pM," sAd /pM, rubih Niz
pY.

"wel, its not," F raplFd Nufili.

"Nwots it abQt?" Askt /pM, lInih fYrwDd And smirih
anuHD wurd.

"its abQt NQ tU stE NApi And kylm unD Yl
surkamstAnsaz!" F jeld.

"NAv jM red it?" Askt /pM.



HAt woz AftD sum ov us wur diskusih Ha grEt
mAstDz ov wizdam, And sumwan woz sEih NQ Yl
ov Hem kEm frum Ha Ist, And F woz sEih HAt
sum ov Hem didant, but NI woz gOih on And on,
Just lFk His sentans, not pEih eni atencan,
Nwen F dasFdad tU rId a kwotESan ov wizdum
frum Ha west, tU prMv HAt Her woz mOr tU Ha
wurld HAn wun-NAlf, And F red:

/Nwen jM wEk up in Ha mYrnih, /pM," sed /piglat at
lAst, Nwots Ha furst Hih jM sE tM jOrself?"

"Nwots fYr brekfast? sed /pM. "Nwot dM jM sE, /piglet?"

"F sE, F wunD Nwots gOih tU NApan eksFtih tadE?"
sed/piglet.

/pM nodad TYtfali.

"its Ha sEm Tih," NI sed.



"Nwots HAt?" Ha unbalIvD Askt.

"wizdum frum a westDn dQist," F sed.

"it sQndz lFk sumTih frum /wini-Ha-pM," NI sed.

"it iz," F sed.

"HAts not abQt dQizm," NI sed.

O, jes it iz," F sed.

"nO, its not," NI sed.

"Nwot dM jM Tihk its abQt?" F sed.

"its abQt His dumpi lital bAr HAt wynDz arQnd Askih
sili kwescunz, mEkih up sYhz, And gOih TrM Yl kindz ov
advencDz, wiHQt evD akUmjMlEtih eni amQnt ov
intalekcUl nolaJ Yr lMzih Niz simpal-mFndad sYrt ov
NApines. HAts Nwot its abQt," NI sed.

"sEm Tih," F sed.

RE: Parallel Shavian with only two corrections.

Currently the proposal has only three changes.
The two corrections previously mentioned
plus a new keyboard for accessing the Shavian sound signs.

The new keyboard is the change that would make the scheme
more accessible to the general public.

The corrections just eliminate two possible critiques.

Quickscript corrects the two transposition errors but it also
drops many analytical features of Shavian.

Quickscript is a little easier to write but just as hard to type.

--Steve

I agree with Steve’s observation. Surely you should make ‘yea’ a deep
character also, in the name of consistency? This would also mean you would have to
adjust ‘yew’ to be a deep character – or surely, make it a short one, so that
it is in line with all the other vowel symbols?
Sure, there are some things I think are silly about Shavian – my only major
gripe is the ‘err’/’air’ reversal which is clearly an error and can easily be
spotted by linguistic novices and experts alike. Despite this glitch I do not
believe it serious enough to warrant making a parallel alphabet to Shavian
with only two letters altered. As for the ‘hung’/’haha’ dispute, I simply do
not accept there was any error made at all.

The solution to this is obvious, in my mind: if one finds Shavian’s
inconsistencies too much to work with, there is already an alternative: it’s called
Quikscript.

Hugh B

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetts wrote:



> The last two tall characters are not unvoiced.
> The last deep characters is not voiced.


(in the reading key, I presume you mean)


That's the point I'm trying to make, 'y' and 'ng' are not
unvoiced, 'h' is; ergo, they are in the wrong place.


> The only thing that can be changed is the sound
> assignment.


As I have suggested. Simply swap the ha/hung
keywords. What could be simpler?


The 'yea'-sign could be used for 'hw' and something else
found for the palatal approximant, perhaps the 'Ian' letter
that no one likes.


Why is this an insurmountable difficulty?


dshep



dshep

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetts wrote:


> Before we screw up keyboard Shavian any more,
> we should consider reforming it.


Fine with me.


> I have advocated using the most readable keyboard
> Shavian be used.

> Although I prefer a scheme that matches up with IPA
> I think most tradspel adepts would prefer something
> closer to Webster notation which is closer to traditional
> English. AEIOU or áéíóú instead of eI i: aI oU ju
> Shavian: E I F O M


Whichever works. Have you put anything together?

But...

> The choice of a Latin or continental sound assignment
> over the shifted English sound assignments will depend
> on the the intended audience. Is it native English
> speakers or ESL students?

Have you taken into account Estuary English? If it becomes the
new, de facto popular standard in Britain, then a second Great
Vowel Shift will have occurred, farther away from continental
values than ever? And in America there are the urban chain-shifts
that Labov writes about, going their merry way. At least the IPA
designations are relatively stable, if sometimes unintuitive for
English-speakers.


> When the keyboard standard is determined, then at least
> one of the Shavian fonts will have to be reworked.

Good. How about something new for the 'w' and 'y' instead of forward
and backward slashes? All the grammatical and punctuational signs are
useful in themselves — pity to do without them.


> Shavian II when completed would correct the two
> transpositions errors in classic Shavian and have a new
> keyboard optimized for readability.


Good.


dshep