Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

Thanks everyone for finding some words with the AH+Loll and On+Loll
combination listed in the dictionary. I'll have to amend the rule to
allow for their existence or scrap the rule entirely.

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Philip Newton"
<philip.newton@...> wrote:
>
> On 8/21/07, RSRICHMOND@... <RSRICHMOND@...> wrote:
> > Baal has been in English (in the Bible) for so long that it's not
really a loan-word, but it's a word many people don't have in their
spoken vocabulary. Its received English pronunciation is like "bale"
or "bail".
>
> I was surprised to see that pronunciation listed when I checked the
> online dictionaries. At least one also gave the "bahl" pronunciation,
> though, with the vowel of "father" or "palm", in addition to the
> "bale" one.
>
> > The Hebrew original has a glottal stop in the middle, rather like
a Scot saying "bottle".
>
> IIRC it's an `ayin, not an 'aleph, in the word -- both are glottal
> stops in modern Israeli Hebrew AFAIK, but were separate way back when
> (and still are among some Hebrew speakers, e.g. Yemeni, I think).
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>
>

Hi again, Ed, Philip and others,

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Philip Newton" wrote:
>
> On 8/21/07, ed_shapard wrote:
> > This wasn't a rule that I came up with upon reflecting on the way
I speak. I spelled a whole lot of words with AH+Loll and On+Loll, but
every time I looked them up in a dictionary, the phonetic spelling
always had the AWE+Loll combination. After being sceptical myself, it
occured to me that the Loll sound changes the sound of AH and On
whenever it is merged with them. I think it changes both AH and On
into AWE; perhaps different shades of the AWE sound, but AWE
nonetheless. And if we accept that it does, then AH+Loll and On+Loll
not only don't exist, but can't exist!
> >
> > Let me know if you can find a dictionary that says otherwise.

It never occurred to me to validate my pronunciation against a
dictionary! ;-) Besides, the days of prescriptive dictionaries is
well past; a useful dictionary is descriptive, reflecting actual
usage. If you want to find a reflection of general current
Australian pronunciation, I suppose one of the many Macquarie
dictionaries would serve. But I doubt you'd find "doll, loll, boll"
with any other sound than On+Loll.


> AHD4 says otherwise, for one. See, for example,
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=loll (search for "American
Heritage Dictionary"), which has the word "loll" spelled with On+Loll.
>
> Also, "Baal" has one pronunciation with Ah+Loll according to AHD4 --
though admittedly, that's a loanword.
>
> Some other examples I tried to come up with that might have On+Loll
turned out to have Oak+Loll instead (so my pronunciation there is
apparently non-standard), but I wouldn't call Ah+Loll or On+Loll
impossible combinations in AHD4 English, though they seem to be rare.
(I like AHD4 in connection with Shavian because the pronunciation it
uses is fairly close to what was used as the basis of Shavian.)
>
> > In my
opinion, all three combinations are so similar that a hypothetical
reader would pronounce them "correctly" for whatever word they're in
no matter which one you use; and he wouldn't have to think about it
either.
>
> I find that "Baal" and "ball" sound very different, and I'd have to
stop and think.

I agree these are different; in Australian speech, the words "Baal,
ball (or bawl), boll" form a minimal triad, with sounds AH+Loll,
AWE+Loll, On+Loll respectively.


> Perhaps it's different for people who merge "short o" and "ah" (for
whom "father" and "bother" rhyme, for example).

Which never happens in Australian speech.


> > Let me know if you can find a dictionary that says otherwise. In
my opinion, all three combinations are so similar that a hypothetical
reader would pronounce them "correctly" for whatever word they're in
no matter which one you use; and he wouldn't have to think about it
either. And since all the dictionary's I've seen use the AWE+Loll
combination, I'd say that's the safe bet.

And in my experience, they're all so different there's no way you'd
expect to be understood in Australia, pronouncing either "Baal"
or "boll" as you do "ball". I don't understand your notion of a
hypothetical reader - we only have real readers to work with, who are
of course speakers before they're readers - and an Australian
speaker's notion of "correctly" will usually differ significantly
from an American speaker's, or from a speaker from Northern Ireland
or Liverpool, and so on. So I'd say there's no "safe bet" that works
equally well for all these different communities of speakers.


> > Incidentally, I didn't agree with everything the dictionaries
say. They all seem to spell the -ing sound as If+huNG, whereas I think
words such as sing, thing, and bling are definitely EAt+huNG (at
least in my dialect).
>
> For me, the vowel before huNG also sounds different, but I think
this is allophony. I have three different vowels in "sin, sing,
seen", for example, so the "sing" vowel is not the same as the "sin"
vowel but not the same as the "seen" vowel, either. Which one it's an
allophone of is not immediately clear, but I treat it as If rather
than as EAt -- there is a predictable sound change when If comes
before huNG.

Hmmm. I have the same (stressed) "short i" sound in all of "sin,
sing, singe, single" etc; but the (stressed) EAt vowel in "seen".


> Incidentally, I also have such an in-between vowel at the end of
words such as "city, gladly", etc. which I also now treat as If.

Fascinating! I have the (unstressed) Eat vowel - same quality, just
no stress. It would sound very affected to Aussie ears to use
a "short i" here, making the two syllables of "city" rhyme.


> I suppose treating those two consistently as allophones of the EAt
phoneme, rather than as allophones of the If phoneme, could also work.

Same allophone, different stress in my analysis.


> (Though especially for the final vowel situation, I believe that
traditional RP uses a clear If vowel, ...

Does it!?


Regards,
Yahya

Ed,

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "ed_shapard" wrote:
...
> As far as Tiddly Wiki goes, one of the great things about it is that
you don't need an HTML editor to edit it. Just save it to your
computer and open it with a browser. Then, when your mouse is over a
tiddler (article) there will appear above the tiddler a link that
says 'edit'. Click on edit, and you'll be able to edit it yourself.
You will need to learn the syntax if you want to do anything fancy,
but for the most part, what you see is what you get. To save the file
correctly, you may have to right click on a link to it and
choose 'save link' instead of choosing 'file - save' while viewing
the page.
>
> After editing, use the 'save changes' link on the right.
>
> If you want a good HTML editor, I use quanta plus which as far as I
know is only for *nix. I hear good things about NVU though.

Thanks for the tips!


> Keep being sceptical of all the "rules" people give you. I admire
that.
>
> -Edward

Ah, but criticising is easy! It only requires (fairly) clear
thinking and a willingness to speak up, which is hardly an act of
courage when the conversation is at the safe distance of email.
Critics'd have no work to do if others didn't create something in the
first place. My real admiration goes to the creative types.

Regards,
Yahya

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, yahya asks:

p.s.: a kwescn fYr Yl membrz:
wUd jM spel "morning" az /mYrniN/ or /mOrniN/?

F fAvr T fYrmr.
/y./a.

sO wUd F. but Hen, F stil ratEn Ha difarans
batwIn "morning" And "mourning" (Az did /SY And
mOst evriwan els At wun tFm, Just a fjM dakEdz
agO).

bakYz meni pIpal tadE kalAps HIz 2 sQndz intM 1,
HE mFt fFnd it simplD tM rFt >mP...< insted, Az
it iz kanvInjantli AmbigjMas.

AmbigjMasli,
/dSep

Hi Folks,

Recently, I've developed a way of teaching Shavian in 4 levels.

Level 1: The Basic Phonemic Letters (38)
p c A
b J F
t j a
d w O
k r U
g l M
T m Q
H n q
f h y
v N Y
s i
z I
S e
Z E

Level 2: Yew and the Rhotic Vowel Letters (6)
V
R
P
X
C
D

Level 3: The Stressed Letters (2)
x
u

Level 4: The Seldom-used Letters (2)
o
W

I think I used the correct font codes for each of the Shavian
Letters; correct me if I'm wrong in my usage of any of them.

Best of Regards,

Carl (Shavian Enthusiast)

Hi Carl
Good to hear from you.
It's been a while. I have been away on Holidays.
I like your levels. It really helps to put the
atressed letters (Err/Urge, Up) and the
seldom used or British Letters (Ian, Yew) to the end.
It is much easier to get the all the Basics down, before
considering rare exceptions, at least from the point of view
of an American English Speaker.
One suggestion.
Level one could be split into the letters which are
mapped exclusively on to their Roman Equivalent and the
other 20, with less familar mapping.

p,b
f,v
t,d
k,g
s,z
m,n
l,r
h,w
_____________
c,J
S,Z
T,H
a,Q
A,F
e,E
i,I
O,q
U,M
j,V
I also added some new pairings for similar sounds
in the Level 1 subset.
It helps the Novice to remember the keyboard mapping.
Remember Shavian letters
accentuate the the Voiceless/Voiced pronunciation.
Regards, Paul V.
________________attached_______________________

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Carl G. Easton"
<shavintel16@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> Recently, I've developed a way of teaching Shavian in 4 levels.
>
> Level 1: The Basic Phonemic Letters (38)
> p c A
> b J F
> t j a
> d w O
> k r U
> g l M
> T m Q
> H n q
> f h y
> v N Y
> s i
> z I
> S e
> Z E
>
> Level 2: Yew and the Rhotic Vowel Letters (6)
> V
> R
> P
> X
> C
> D
>
> Level 3: The Stressed Letters (2)
> x
> u
>
> Level 4: The Seldom-used Letters (2)
> o
> W
>
> I think I used the correct font codes for each of the Shavian
> Letters; correct me if I'm wrong in my usage of any of them.
>
> Best of Regards,
>
> Carl (Shavian Enthusiast)
>

Hi Carl,

Yours is a great idea! And Paul's suggestions also have merit.
Would you consider incorporating them into your system?

Another advantage of introducing a fifth level is that it makes each
level more of a "bite-sized" chunk of learning.

Could you please explain why you group Yew with the rhotics? It
seems to me to belong more naturally with Ian.

Regards,
Yahya

music on the web: www.esnips.com/web/yahyas-music


--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink"
<vandenbrinkg@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Carl
> Good to hear from you.
> It's been a while. I have been away on Holidays.
> I like your levels. It really helps to put the
> atressed letters (Err/Urge, Up) and the
> seldom used or British Letters (Ian, Yew) to the end.
> It is much easier to get the all the Basics down, before
> considering rare exceptions, at least from the point of view
> of an American English Speaker.
> One suggestion.
> Level one could be split into the letters which are
> mapped exclusively on to their Roman Equivalent and the
> other 20, with less familar mapping.
>
> p,b
> f,v
> t,d
> k,g
> s,z
> m,n
> l,r
> h,w
> _____________
> c,J
> S,Z
> T,H
> a,Q
> A,F
> e,E
> i,I
> O,q
> U,M
> j,V
> I also added some new pairings for similar sounds
> in the Level 1 subset.
> It helps the Novice to remember the keyboard mapping.
> Remember Shavian letters
> accentuate the the Voiceless/Voiced pronunciation.
> Regards, Paul V.
> ________________attached_______________________
>
> --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Carl G. Easton"
> <shavintel16@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > Recently, I've developed a way of teaching Shavian in 4 levels.
> >
> > Level 1: The Basic Phonemic Letters (38)
> > p c A
> > b J F
> > t j a
> > d w O
> > k r U
> > g l M
> > T m Q
> > H n q
> > f h y
> > v N Y
> > s i
> > z I
> > S e
> > Z E
> >
> > Level 2: Yew and the Rhotic Vowel Letters (6)
> > V
> > R
> > P
> > X
> > C
> > D
> >
> > Level 3: The Stressed Letters (2)
> > x
> > u
> >
> > Level 4: The Seldom-used Letters (2)
> > o
> > W
> >
> > I think I used the correct font codes for each of the Shavian
> > Letters; correct me if I'm wrong in my usage of any of them.
> >
> > Best of Regards,
> >
> > Carl (Shavian Enthusiast)
> >
>

Hi Paul,

Great suggestion! Originally, I did have the basic letters paired. But I didn't have a copy of the pairs with me at College, so I just did it from the top of my head. I've had this idea of teaching Shavian by levels for over 6 months if my memory is correct. I've just never got around to it till decided to just do even though I wasn't fully prepared.

I write more later.

Best of Regards,

Carl

paul vandenbrink <vandenbrinkg@...> wrote:
Hi Carl
Good to hear from you.
It's been a while. I have been away on Holidays.
I like your levels. It really helps to put the
atressed letters (Err/Urge, Up) and the
seldom used or British Letters (Ian, Yew) to the end.
It is much easier to get the all the Basics down, before
considering rare exceptions, at least from the point of view
of an American English Speaker.
One suggestion.
Level one could be split into the letters which are
mapped exclusively on to their Roman Equivalent and the
other 20, with less familar mapping.

p,b
f,v
t,d
k,g
s,z
m,n
l,r
h,w
_____________
c,J
S,Z
T,H
a,Q
A,F
e,E
i,I
O,q
U,M
j,V
I also added some new pairings for similar sounds
in the Level 1 subset.
It helps the Novice to remember the keyboard mapping.
Remember Shavian letters
accentuate the the Voiceless/Voiced pronunciation.
Regards, Paul V.
________________attached_______________________

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Carl G. Easton"
<shavintel16@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> Recently, I've developed a way of teaching Shavian in 4 levels.
>
> Level 1: The Basic Phonemic Letters (38)
> p c A
> b J F
> t j a
> d w O
> k r U
> g l M
> T m Q
> H n q
> f h y
> v N Y
> s i
> z I
> S e
> Z E
>
> Level 2: Yew and the Rhotic Vowel Letters (6)
> V
> R
> P
> X
> C
> D
>
> Level 3: The Stressed Letters (2)
> x
> u
>
> Level 4: The Seldom-used Letters (2)
> o
> W
>
> I think I used the correct font codes for each of the Shavian
> Letters; correct me if I'm wrong in my usage of any of them.
>
> Best of Regards,
>
> Carl (Shavian Enthusiast)
>






---------------------------------
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.

Hi Yahya,

What do you suggest for making the level system more "bit-sized", I like to hear what you have to say about that.

The reason I've put "Yew" with the Rhotic Vowels is because it is just as common as the Rhotic Vowels. It's found in words like "Human" and "Universal", etc...
And its also a consonant and vowel ligature.

Hope this helps,

Best of Regards,

Carl

Yahya <yahya@...> wrote:

Hi Carl,

Yours is a great idea! And Paul's suggestions also have merit.
Would you consider incorporating them into your system?

Another advantage of introducing a fifth level is that it makes each
level more of a "bite-sized" chunk of learning.

Could you please explain why you group Yew with the rhotics? It
seems to me to belong more naturally with Ian.

Regards,
Yahya

music on the web: www.esnips.com/web/yahyas-music

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink"
<vandenbrinkg@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Carl
> Good to hear from you.
> It's been a while. I have been away on Holidays.
> I like your levels. It really helps to put the
> atressed letters (Err/Urge, Up) and the
> seldom used or British Letters (Ian, Yew) to the end.
> It is much easier to get the all the Basics down, before
> considering rare exceptions, at least from the point of view
> of an American English Speaker.
> One suggestion.
> Level one could be split into the letters which are
> mapped exclusively on to their Roman Equivalent and the
> other 20, with less familar mapping.
>
> p,b
> f,v
> t,d
> k,g
> s,z
> m,n
> l,r
> h,w
> _____________
> c,J
> S,Z
> T,H
> a,Q
> A,F
> e,E
> i,I
> O,q
> U,M
> j,V
> I also added some new pairings for similar sounds
> in the Level 1 subset.
> It helps the Novice to remember the keyboard mapping.
> Remember Shavian letters
> accentuate the the Voiceless/Voiced pronunciation.
> Regards, Paul V.
> ________________attached_______________________
>
> --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Carl G. Easton"
> <shavintel16@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > Recently, I've developed a way of teaching Shavian in 4 levels.
> >
> > Level 1: The Basic Phonemic Letters (38)
> > p c A
> > b J F
> > t j a
> > d w O
> > k r U
> > g l M
> > T m Q
> > H n q
> > f h y
> > v N Y
> > s i
> > z I
> > S e
> > Z E
> >
> > Level 2: Yew and the Rhotic Vowel Letters (6)
> > V
> > R
> > P
> > X
> > C
> > D
> >
> > Level 3: The Stressed Letters (2)
> > x
> > u
> >
> > Level 4: The Seldom-used Letters (2)
> > o
> > W
> >
> > I think I used the correct font codes for each of the Shavian
> > Letters; correct me if I'm wrong in my usage of any of them.
> >
> > Best of Regards,
> >
> > Carl (Shavian Enthusiast)
> >
>






---------------------------------
Building a website is a piece of cake.
Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.

Hi Carl and Yahya

I like the idea of Teaching Shavian in 5 levels, especially if we
are introducing the letters through typing rather than drawing.
I think by giving students a Shaw font, and letting them see the
letters right away, it gives them a Jump-start on learning the Shae
Alphabet. Hand Writing should come later.

I think these 8 letter pairs make a good size bite.
> > p,b
> > f,v
> > t,d
> > k,g
> > s,z
> > m,n
> > l,r
> > h,w

They are very common consonant sounds in English. They also include
Tall, Short and Deep letters, which is important to teach right
upfront. It is also useful to use them to show how Consonont
clusters work.

I would also like to get away from calling these composite sounds
ligatures. They all are actually single distinct sounds,
that I would
tend to include in with the other simple Vowel Letters.
For example, I use the Letter Yew to also represent the Dipthong
"ew" in words such as new, few, cute, fuel and skew.

And I note in the pronunciation key of www.dictionary.com
they find it necessary to distnguish the 4 r-based vowel sounds.
[air] air, careful, wear
[eer] ear, hero, beer
[er] teacher, afterward, murderer
[ur] early, bird, stirring
I guess [or} isn't common in American pronunciation as people say
saw-ree instead of sore-ee (Sorry about that)

Just because Diagraphs were the only practical way of writing these
r-based vowel sounds in the Roman Alphabet,
doesn't mean we should buy into
the fallacy, that they are really in fact 2 distinct sounds written
togather
strictly because they are common juxtapositions.
I consider them to distinct sounds, no different in principle than
the five common English Dipthongs (Ai, Ei, Oi, Ow, Ew)

So what do you think, Carl

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. Yahya,
I would include Yew with the Dipthongs, myself, albeit an
exceptional one..

P.P.S. There is a nice description of the current
Northern British English Vowels at
http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/johnm/flash/nevkey.htm
Along with a neat interactive quiz where you click on the
correct vowel for each sample word. Note that some of these
vowels are only found with a followng r-sound.

Regards, Paul V.
________________attached________________________________
--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, carl easton <shavintel16@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Yahya,
>
> What do you suggest for making the level system more "bit-
sized", I like to hear what you have to say about that.
>
> The reason I've put "Yew" with the Rhotic Vowels is because it
is just as common as the Rhotic Vowels. It's found in words
like "Human" and "Universal", etc...
> And its also a consonant and vowel ligature.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Best of Regards,
>
> Carl
>
> Yahya <yahya@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Carl,
>
> Yours is a great idea! And Paul's suggestions also have merit.
> Would you consider incorporating them into your system?
>
> Another advantage of introducing a fifth level is that it makes
each
> level more of a "bite-sized" chunk of learning.
>
> Could you please explain why you group Yew with the rhotics? It
> seems to me to belong more naturally with Ian.