Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

On 7/15/06, Lionel Ghoti <Lionel.Ghoti@...> wrote:
> Query: The monoalphabetical edition of Androcles and the Lion is out
> of copyright and is available for download from Project Gutenberg.
> Does that mean that the Shavian-Roman bialphabetical edition is also
> out of copyright?

I'm not a lawyer, so I have no idea.

However, I think one component of copyright is when something was
first published; the Shaw Alphabet edition of Androcles and the Lion
was, apparently, first published in 1962, while the first Roman
edition was published in 1913.

An interesting comment on the copyright page of the SAeoAatL is, "Any
non-copyright work may be transliterated into the Shaw Alphabet
without permission. In the case of a work still in copyright, however,
permission must, of course, be obtained from the owner of the
copyright".

Which sounds to me as if you could legally publish _your own_ version
of Androcles with a matching Shaw Alphabet version on opposite pages
_providing you did the transliteration yourself_.

You'd then be publishing the Roman version (which, you say, is out of
copyright, and does not require permission) and a transliteration of
your own (for which you also do not need permission, according to that
note).

As for the legality of (re)publishing the _existing_ biscriptal
version, I have no idea.

Cheers,
--
Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Philip Newton"
<philip.newton@...> wrote:
>
> On 7/15/06, Lionel Ghoti <Lionel.Ghoti@...> wrote:
> > Query: The monoalphabetical edition of Androcles and the Lion is out
> > of copyright and is available for download from Project Gutenberg.
> > Does that mean that the Shavian-Roman bialphabetical edition is also
> > out of copyright?
>
> I'm not a lawyer, so I have no idea.
>
> However, I think one component of copyright is when something was
> first published; the Shaw Alphabet edition of Androcles and the Lion
> was, apparently, first published in 1962, while the first Roman
> edition was published in 1913.
>
> An interesting comment on the copyright page of the SAeoAatL is, "Any
> non-copyright work may be transliterated into the Shaw Alphabet
> without permission. In the case of a work still in copyright, however,
> permission must, of course, be obtained from the owner of the
> copyright".
>
> Which sounds to me as if you could legally publish _your own_ version
> of Androcles with a matching Shaw Alphabet version on opposite pages
> _providing you did the transliteration yourself_.
>
> You'd then be publishing the Roman version (which, you say, is out of
> copyright, and does not require permission) and a transliteration of
> your own (for which you also do not need permission, according to that
> note).
>
> As for the legality of (re)publishing the _existing_ biscriptal
> version, I have no idea.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>

That's one of the semi-conclusions I came to. But then I wondered,
does a transliteration into another alphabet, which is not a creative
act, produce a new bit of intellectual property, or is it just a
different version of the original bit of intellectual property? I
think I have decided to have faith in the belief that a
transliteration is just a dumb bit of rendering of the original and
does not constitute a new copyrighted work in itself. I don't think
I'll pursue this any further and will wait to see if anyone asks me to
remove the file from my site.

On 7/15/06, Lionel Ghoti <Lionel.Ghoti@...> wrote:
> does a transliteration into another alphabet, which is not a creative
> act, produce a new bit of intellectual property, or is it just a
> different version of the original bit of intellectual property?

Good question. Once the dialect you're using is fixed, it certainly
needs little thought (as long as you're a human capable of
distinguishing between homographs). Miles away from a translation into
another language, which actually requires some thought and, as you
say, creativity.

Cheers,
--
Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>

helO grMp,

anaTx pAsiJ in SYvWn.
F wil trF t get H hOl wxk dan, pIs bF pIs, As tFm pxmits.

************
/H /mistik /tQx
fram fXfAks kRtrFt's
H mistik rOz fram H gRden v H kiN

pXagrAf's 1 trM 3

in mF wYndxiNz in H /strEnJ /lAnd His did F sI:

a /templ bilt lFk a /tQx, rFziN t a grEt hFt, sxQnded At its bEs bF a
sxkalx kolanEd.

impeld bF H dizFx t lxn, F nokd At H /gEt v H /templ n prEd f admitens.
a venxabl Old mAn - H /sEJ v H /templ - Opend H /gEt n sed t mI, 'wat
sIkest HQ?' F riplFd, '/noliJ.' hI sed, 'hAst HQ H streNkT n ditxmanESon t
klFm t H topmOst cEmbx v H /tQx!' F sed, 'H dizFx hAv F if HQ wilt bI mF
gFd t SO mI H wE.' Hen hI strecd Qt hiz hAnd n rEzd mI up, sEiN: 'if HF
hRt iz stQt, kros H HreShOld v H /templ v /hVman /noliJ.' F sIzd H profxd
hAnd, n wiT H /sEJ F pAsd undx H mFtI /gEtwE v H /templ. wen F entxd H
prIsiNktz v H bildiN, F sY HAt a stEtlI kolanEd rAn in a sxkl rQnd H
trFANelx /tQx, wic sImd t rFz t a gidI hFt abav mI; n presentlI As F
lUkd F pxsIvd HAt H wYl bihFnd H kolanEd waz kavxd wiT reprizentESanz
v hVman figxz, n mF /gFd spOk: 'bihOld, H /sFkl v /hVman /lFf! sI /mAn Az
hI apCeT t H hVman F!'

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

regRdz,
/brFAn /AlJxI
http://shavian.metabright.com/

Hi Philip
I have to agree with you.
The new preface and the appendixes in the Bi-alphabetic version are
still under copywrite, but there would be no problem if we re-did
the transliteration. There were a number of typos in the original
Shavian text that never got corrected, anyway. Also I would like to
bring the pronunciation up to date, when it is obviously archaic.
Also since it is Historical Fiction, a brief introduction to the time
period and the Religous Issues of the Christian Martyrs would be a
nice addition for the Non-Christian Readers of any new edition.
Regards, Paul V.
P.S. I would also like to eliminate the Ian Letter from the
transliteration, as it is rarely used anymore, even in RP English
(i.e. musketeer?)

____________________________attached_______________________
--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Philip Newton"
<philip.newton@...> wrote:
> However, I think one component of copyright is when something was
> first published; the Shaw Alphabet edition of Androcles and the Lion
> was, apparently, first published in 1962, while the first Roman
> edition was published in 1913.
>
> An interesting comment on the copyright page of the SAeoAatL
is, "Any
> non-copyright work may be transliterated into the Shaw Alphabet
> without permission. In the case of a work still in copyright,
however,
> permission must, of course, be obtained from the owner of the
> copyright".
>
> Which sounds to me as if you could legally publish _your own_
version
> of Androcles with a matching Shaw Alphabet version on opposite pages
> _providing you did the transliteration yourself_.
>
> You'd then be publishing the Roman version (which, you say, is out
of
> copyright, and does not require permission) and a transliteration of
> your own (for which you also do not need permission, according to
that
> note).
>
> As for the legality of re-publishing the _existing_ biscriptal
> version, I have no idea.

Hi Lionel
If it was a creative act, which I would hesitate to say it is,
wouldn't a new Copywrite be assigned to the Transliterator?
Regards, Paul V.
P.S. Plagiarizing from the dead has a long and honored history in
British Literature, going back to Shakespeare and including Lewis
Carroll.
--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Lionel Ghoti"
<Lionel.Ghoti@...> wrote:
>
> --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Philip Newton"
> <philip.newton@> wrote:
> >
> > On 7/15/06, Lionel Ghoti <Lionel.Ghoti@> wrote:
> > > Query: The monoalphabetical edition of Androcles and the Lion
is out
> > > of copyright and is available for download from Project
Gutenberg.
> > > Does that mean that the Shavian-Roman bialphabetical edition is
also
> > > out of copyright?
> >
> > I'm not a lawyer, so I have no idea.
> >
> > However, I think one component of copyright is when something was
> > first published; the Shaw Alphabet edition of Androcles and the
Lion
> > was, apparently, first published in 1962, while the first Roman
> > edition was published in 1913.
> >
> > An interesting comment on the copyright page of the SAeoAatL
is, "Any
> > non-copyright work may be transliterated into the Shaw Alphabet
> > without permission. In the case of a work still in copyright,
however,
> > permission must, of course, be obtained from the owner of the
> > copyright".
> >
> > Which sounds to me as if you could legally publish _your own_
version
> > of Androcles with a matching Shaw Alphabet version on opposite
pages
> > _providing you did the transliteration yourself_.
> >
> > You'd then be publishing the Roman version (which, you say, is
out of
> > copyright, and does not require permission) and a transliteration
of
> > your own (for which you also do not need permission, according to
that
> > note).
> >
> > As for the legality of (re)publishing the _existing_ biscriptal
> > version, I have no idea.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > --
> > Philip Newton <philip.newton@>
>
> That's one of the semi-conclusions I came to. But then I wondered,
> does a transliteration into another alphabet, which is not a
creative
> act, produce a new bit of intellectual property, or is it just a
> different version of the original bit of intellectual property? I
> think I have decided to have faith in the belief that a
> transliteration is just a dumb bit of rendering of the original and
> does not constitute a new copyrighted work in itself. I don't think
> I'll pursue this any further and will wait to see if anyone asks me
to
> remove the file from my site.
>

Hi Paul Vandenbrink and all!

>> I would like to bring the pronunciation up to date, when it is obviously
archaic. -- I would also like to eliminate the Ian Letter [and also the Ear
letter?] from the transliteration, as [they are] rarely used anymore, even in RP
English (i.e. musketeer?)<<

I wouldn't do either of these things. This is a historical document and we
shouldn't try to "bring it up to date."

I would, however, correct the typos.

Bob Richmond

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, RSRICHMOND@... wrote:
>
> I wouldn't do either of these things. This is a historical document
and we
> shouldn't try to "bring it up to date."
>
> I would, however, correct the typos.
>
> Bob Richmond
>

I'm with Bob, apart from the bit about typos. The PDF document I've
uploaded is really just a facsimile of the Penguin book, albeit a
Roman-searchable one, thanks to the PDF creation software. If anyone
wants to produce a modified version of our weird bible, that's up to
them. Incidentally, it would be an interesting test of
phpGhotiFilleter, once I've finished tweaking it, to run the Gutenberg
text of Androcles through the filleter and compare the output with the
Shavian text of the Penguin book.

************
/H /mistik /tQx
fram fXfAks kRtrFt's
H mistik rOz fram H gRden v H kiN

pXagrAf's 4 trM 6

Hen F lUkd agin, n F sY HAt H fxst pikcx, bF H /entrents /gEt,
reprizented H /cFldhUd v /mAn, n H /EnJl v /lFf waz drYiN bAk H /vEl,
bIond wic lE H /wxd wiT Yl itz dEnJxz n posibilitIz, n H /cildren fUl v
JqAns wx mRciN fPwxd t entx H /promisd /lAnd; but F sY HAt HX waz
a lUk v pitI on H fEs v H /EnJl, f in H dRknes bF H /vEl krQcd H
figx v /sEtAn, mRkiN wiT hiz klYz upon H sAnd H numbx v HOz wMm hI
wUd divQx. n Az F gEzd longx At H cildren, F bigAn t pxsIv HAt Ic
cFld reprizented sam tFp v /hVmAnitI. HX F sY H jang /kiN aprOciN H
/vEl wiT fxm step, but wiT Y upon hiz fEs, az hI gEzd upon HAt unnOn
/wxld wic hI wUd bI kYld upon t gavxn, n bF hiz sFd waz a VT wiT
viSas fEs n envI in hiz hRt, sIkiN t /pUS asFd H jang /kiN HAt hI mFt
entx fxst intM pazeSen v H /wxld. menI cildren F sY bubliN Ovx wiT
igzMbxents v VT, plIzd wiT wat lE arQnd Hem, n lUkiN not fR ahed intM
HAt mistCIas /wxld wic waz bIiN disklOsd t Hem. wan mEdin F nOtisd gEziN
xnestlI At H /stR v /luv, wic fram abav SOn dQn upon H /wxld v /VT, n
anaTx mEdin - in wMm waz H /sOl v H wYnten - waz bendiN dQn t H
grQnd t plak a rOz, n in hx hEst t sIz it a TPn hAd prikd hx fiNx.

F folOd mF /gFd arQnd H kolanEd, n At Ic step F sY H sAm cildren grOn
Oldx - hAviN AdvAnsd a litl on H /JxnI v /lFf; n F sY menI fYl bF H wE,
n wen F kEm t H lAst /pikcx F sY HAt fV wx left - H Asetik /dxviS, wPn
n imESIEted - H mAn hO hAd sYt f /god HrM H /spirit - n H EJd /kiN, fUl v
grAvitI - H mAn hO hAd sYt f /god bF strFviN t Akt akPdiN t hiz lFts in H
/wxld; lOnlImes waz arQnd Hez tM, but HE hIded it not, n bihFnd H HrOn v
H /kiN stUd, wiT hx Rms krosd n on hx fEs a lUk v impenetrablnes, H .EnJl
v /lFf, nQ cEnJd intM H /EnJl v /deT.

sAdend bF wat F hAd sIn, F wiTdrM fram H kolanEd, n in H sunSFn 'v H
plezent gRden rQnd H bEs v H /tQx F sAt f a long wFl meditEtiN on H
vAnitI v hVmAn igzistens.

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

regRdz,
/brFAn /AlJxI
http://shavian.metabright.com/

Okay, here's the site as it stands now. It's just the "skeleton," really
- all the navigation's in place and the design is pretty much final. Any
recommendations you have for the link structure would be greatly
appreciated - it's a bit of a mess right now, I'll admit, but it's all
there and legible (I hope!).

OkE, hC'z H sFt Az it stAndz nQ. it'z Just H "skelitan," rIli - yl H
nAvigESan'z in plEs n H dizFn iz priti muc fFnal. anI rekamendESanz V
hAv fP H link strukSD wUd bI grEtli apriSiEtad - it'z a bit v a mes rFt
nQ, F'l Admit, but it'z yl HEr n leJibal (F hOp!).

Link: http://www.circuitous.net/learnshav/

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "circtf" <circtf@...> wrote:
>
> Hey Paul, can I borrow some or all of this? I've got a project for
class
> to make an instructional website, and I figured Shavian would be a
good
> topic choice. I've already done some basic work for it, but this would
> be really helpful. :D
>
> hE pYl, kAn F byrO sum P yl v His? F'v got a proJekt fP klAs t mEk an
> instrukSinal websFt, n F figyDd /SyvWn wUd bI a gUd topik cqs. F'v
> ylredI dun sum bEsik wxk fP it, but His wUd bI rIli helpfal.
>
>
> --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink"
> pvandenbrink11@ wrote:
> >
> > Table of Contents
> > * Note that individual Lessons are grouped under Chapter Headings
> >
> > 1. Frequently Asked Questions (f.A.k.)
> > 2. Introduction and History of the Shaw Alphabet
> > 3. Overview and Shaw Alphabet Examples
> > 4. Writing Consonant Sounds with the Shaw Alphabet (22)
> > Lesson 1 -- Strong Dull Consonants (Vow, Bib, Dead, Gag)
> > Lesson 2 -- Strong Sharp Sibulants (Zoo, Measure/Genre, They,
Judge)
> > Lesson 3 –- Plain Dull Consonants (Fee, Peep, Tot, Kick )
> > Lesson 4 -- Plain Sharp Sibulants (So, Sure, Thigh, Church)
> > Lesson 5 -- Nasal Consonant Sounds (Mime, Nun, Hung/Ing)
> > Lesson 6 –- Aspirate and other Weak Consonants (Ha-ha, Woe,
Yea)
> >
> > 5. Writing Liquid Sounds with the Shaw Alphabet (8)
> > Lesson 7 -- Liquid Consonant Sounds (Loll, Roar)
> > Lesson 8 -- Liquid Vowel Sounds (Array, Err/Urge, Are, Ear, Or,
Air)
> >
> > 6. Writing Simple Vowel Sounds with the Shaw Alphabet (12)
> > Lesson 9 -- Minimal Vowels (Ado, Array)
> > Lesson 10 -– Short Vowels (If, Ah, Wool, On, Up, Ash, Egg)
> > Lesson 11 -– Long Vowels (Eat, Awe, Ooze, Oat)
> >
> > 7. Writing Complicated Vowel Sounds with the Shaw Alphabet (5)
> > Lesson 12 –- Dipthongs (Age, Ice, Out, Oil)
> > Lesson 13 -- Yew, Semi-Vowel and Dipthong
> > Lesson 14 -- Dipthongs combined with Liquid Vowel (Array)
> >
> > 8. Miscellaneous Shavian Writing Conventions
> > Lesson 15 –- Left-over Shavian Letters under American
> Pronunciation
> > Lesson 16 -- Numbers (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, l0, ...)
> > Lesson 17 -- Punctuation and lack of Apostrophe and Capitalization
> > Lesson 18 -- Quotes, Namer Sign and other Word markers
> > Lesson 19 –- Shavian Abbreviations
> >
> > 9. Test Yourself and Review
> > 10. Samples
> > Sample Sentences that use every Shavian letter
> > Sample Shavian Proverbs (1-54)
> > Sample Psalm 23 (1-4)
> > Sample Vocabulary (inklMdz 250 mOst kyman /iNgliS wxdz)
> >
> > 11. Brief History of George Bernard Shaw and Development of the
> > Shavian Alphabet
> > 12. Shaw Alphabet, the Computer, Word Processing and the Internet
> >
> > Appendixes
> > Appendix 1 -- Androcles and the Lion in Shavian (First Act)
> > Appendix 2 –- Original Shavian Alphabet Key
> > Appendix 3 -- Americanized Shavian Alphabet Key
> > Appendix 3 -- Shaw Namer Sign and Abbreviations
> > Appendix 4 –- Keyboard Mapping for Shaw Alphabet
> > Appendix 5 -- Links for Shavian Fonts
> > Appendix 6 –- Glossary of Linguistic and Shavian
Terminology
> >
>