Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

Hi Steve
How did you get the Shaw Sans. 2 Font to display in your message?
It looked pretty good, the 2 lines were a little bit crowded together
but still it was the Shaw Letters.
I'd like to be able to do that too.

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. as far as the Array and the Err/Urge sounds go, even tho, I can
hear the difference (more a matter of length and stress than anything
else), I still consider them as one Phoneme. For conveniance call the
Phoneme "er". In a Closed Syllable, the "er" is usually
pronounced "urge" and in an Open syllable it is pronounced "array".
Does anyone have any good, single syllable words, where the
difference of these two sounds, produces a significant pair of
mutually exclusive distinct words.
P.P.S. There is a Linguistic term for such a Pair of words, but I
can't recall it at the moment.
_____________attached__________________________


--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetta@a... wrote:
> Sx sanz #2 wil bE D prEfcrd font fOr
> SAvicn tranzkripScnz on Dis sIt
>
> Viewable with Shaw Sans No. 2 installed
>
> /3/ (as in urge /3`dZ/) is recognized as one of the phonemes of
spoken
> English (obscure vowel) but it is not uniquely represented in the
alphabet. /3`j/
> is spelled urge, /3`nd/ is spelled earned /s3`f@`/ surfer. ENgliS
& Shavian
> handle this well:
>
> ENgliS: Rj, Rnd, sRfar, sufar
> Shavian:. xJ, xnd, sxfD, sufD.
> Unifon does not: urj, urn, surfcr, sufcr.
>
> I want a uni-key that can be taught to everyone and used to display
any set
> of special characters such as Shavian, Unifon, i/t/a, Webster, or
IPA.
>
> uni-key would be use as the keyboard map and for discussing speech
sounds in
> ASCII email.
>
> The next step up would be a more natural looking digraphic/accented
phonemic
> writing system [Webster Latin 1]. For some reason, this does not
always come
> across as Latin 1. Sometimes it is auto-converted into Unicode.
>
> Shô wil bé ð préfûrd fönt fôr Sháviøn transkripshønz ön
ðis sýt.
>
> This is supposed to be Latin 1 with no Unicode.
>
> Snô wil bé ... I kant désýfer the rest.
>
> Webster Latin 1 can be easily typed after a 5 min. installation of
the
> International keyboard. 95% of the email editors can interpret
these codes but
> sometimes they are auto-converted to Unicode which cannot be
interpreted by some
> email editors.
>
> This is what happened above. One can often play around with the
encoding and
> get some readable text.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shawalphabet/files
>
>
> Steve T. Bett, Ph.D.
> Austin, Texas
> mailto:sbett@l... 512-302-3014
> www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett
> retired professor, volunteer literacy instructor
> moderator of Saundspel -the phonology forum
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saundspel

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 07:10:10 -0000, paul vandenbrink
<pvandenbrink@...> wrote:
>
> P.S. as far as the Array and the Err/Urge sounds go, even tho, I can
> hear the difference (more a matter of length and stress than anything
> else), I still consider them as one Phoneme.

Yes, they're one phoneme for me, too, just like Ado and Up; for me,
they differ in stress.

That is, to use X-SAMPA (a representation of the IPA in ASCII) an /@/
in a stressed syllable will be pronounced [V] (Up) and in an
unstressed syllable will be pronounced [@] (Ado); an /@`/ in a
stressed syllable will be pronounced somethign like [3`] (Urge) and in
an unstressed syllable will be [@`] (Array).

Urge and Array are quite a bit closer in pronunciation for me than Ado
and Up, which sound noticeably different to me.

> For conveniance call the
> Phoneme "er". In a Closed Syllable, the "er" is usually
> pronounced "urge" and in an Open syllable it is pronounced "array".

I'd use "stressed" and "unstressed" syllables rather than "closed" and
"open" ones.

> Does anyone have any good, single syllable words, where the
> difference of these two sounds, produces a significant pair of
> mutually exclusive distinct words.

I don't think there are such, since single-syllable words have that
single syllable stressed almost by definition, so "Array" and "Ado"
will generally not occur in them -- at least for "content words".
(Small words such as prepositions and articles, which rarely occur
alone and are usually pronounced together with the next word, would be
exceptions: as with the definite article, which is [@] for me before
consonants rather than [V] or [EI], and [@n] before vowels rather than
[{n].)

However, for two-syllable words, a good example for Urge/Array might
be "perfect/perfect": the adjective has stress on the first syllable,
so uses Urge in "per-", while the verb has stress on the second
syllable, so uses Array in "per-".

I can't think of a good example for two words which differ only in
having Ado vs Up, but one with a two-word phrase vs. one word is
"mention" vs "men shun"; for me, "mention" has stress on the first
syllable, so the second, unstressed, syllable has Ado, while for "men
shun", I stress both syllables, since they are separate words, so the
second has Up. I also hear a difference in vowel sound here.

> P.P.S. There is a Linguistic term for such a Pair of words, but I
> can't recall it at the moment.

"Minimal pairs"?

At least, that's the term I'd use for pairs such as "bat" and "bad"
which differ only in one phoneme, or "thigh" and "thy" -- so I suppose
it'd work for "perfect" and "perfect" as well, which differ not at all
in phonemes (in my analysis) but do differ in stress, which results
(for my speech) in different pronunciations as different allophones of
phonemes are selected.

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

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 00:40:38 EST, stbetta@... <stbetta@...> wrote:
>
> Sx sanz #2 wil bE D prEfcrd font fOr
> SAvicn tranzkripScnz on Dis sIt

I saw Shavian letters in the original (HTML) message, but it made no
sense to me --

"Shore sans #3 will bay ur prayfchrd font fowr
Shavvitchn trunzcripshchns on ariss seat"?

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

Phil V and Phil M,

> PV: Does anyone have any good, single syllable words, where the
> difference of these two sounds, produces a significant pair of
> mutually exclusive distinct words.

SB: If single syllable words are always stressed and schwa-ado /@/ and array
/@r/ are always unstressed, there would be no one syllable words with these
phonemes.

illusion / allusion and except / accept are minimal pairs for the unstressed
i and the unstressed schwa. However, some people do not differentiate these
words.

PV: as far as the Array and the Err/Urge sounds go, even tho, I can
> hear the difference (more a matter of length and stress than anything
> else), I still consider them as one Phoneme.

PN: Yes, they're one phoneme for me, too, just like Ado and Up; for me,
they differ in stress.

SB: Ado and Up represent two phonemes in IPA but this does not mean that they
have to be recognized in a particular orthography. I find the it useful to
include them
because I think that relative stress within a word is a key feature of
English.
On the other hand, orthographies that have a symbol for stress do not retain
the
vowel spelling of the root word, e.g., fatografi fotagraf

PN: That is, to use X-SAMPA (a representation of the IPA in ASCII) an /@/
in a stressed syllable will be pronounced [V] (Up) and in an
unstressed syllable will be pronounced [@] (Ado); an /@`/ in a
stressed syllable will be pronounced somethign like [3`] (Urge) and in
an unstressed syllable will be [@`] (Array).

Urge and Array are quite a bit closer in pronunciation for me than Ado
and Up, which sound noticeably different to me.

> For conveniance call the
> Phoneme "er". In a Closed Syllable, the "er" is usually
> pronounced "urge" and in an Open syllable it is pronounced "array".

PN: I'd use "stressed" and "unstressed" syllables rather than "closed" and
"open" ones.

PN: I don't think there are such, since single-syllable words have that
single syllable stressed almost by definition, so "Array" and "Ado"
will generally not occur in them -- at least for "content words".
(Small words such as prepositions and articles, which rarely occur
alone and are usually pronounced together with the next word, would be
exceptions: as with the definite article, which is [@] for me before
consonants rather than [V] or [EI], and [@n] before vowels rather than
[{n].)

a pooh bear @ pü bEr a pM ber/bear
ado there @dü ðEr adM Der

However, for two-syllable words, a good example for Urge/Array might
be "perfect/perfect": the adjective has stress on the first syllable,
so uses Urge in "per-", while the verb has stress on the second
syllable, so uses Array in "per-".

sb: There are dozens of examples of words that are pronounced differently
depending on the part of speech. See www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett/spanglish.htm

(improve) (ideal)
Tradspel: perfect perfect men shun mention
Spanglish perfect purfect/purfact men shun menshan
Unifon pcrfekt purfekt men Sun menScn
ENgliS parfekt pRfekt men Sun menSan
Shavian pDfekt pxfekt men Sun menSan

On these words there is close agreement in the keyboard versions of
Shavian, ENgliS and Shavian. ENgliS does not have a display font so
extra effort is made to make the keyboard spelling recognizable.

PN: I can't think of a good example for two words which differ only in
having Ado vs Up, but one with a two-word phrase vs. one word is
"mention" vs "men shun"; for me, "mention" has stress on the first
syllable, so the second, unstressed, syllable has Ado, while for "men
shun", I stress both syllables, since they are separate words, so the
second has Up. I also hear a difference in vowel sound here.

> PV: There is a Linguistic term for such a Pair of words, but I
> can't recall it at the moment.

"Minimal pairs"? PN=Philip Newton philip.newton@gmail.com

PN: At least, that's the term I'd use for pairs such as "bat" and "bad"
which differ only in one phoneme, or "thigh" and "thy" -- so I suppose
it'd work for "perfect" and "perfect" as well, which differ not at all
in phonemes (in my analysis) but do differ in stress, which results
(for my speech) in different pronunciations as different allophones of
phonemes are selected.

--Steve


Steve T. Bett, Ph.D.
Austin, Texas
mailto:sbett@...m 512-302-3014
www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett
retired professor, volunteer literacy instructor
moderator of Saundspel -the phonology forum
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saundspel

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:38:28 EST, stbetta@... <stbetta@...> wrote:
>
> Ado and Up represent two phonemes in IPA

Careful! IPA is the International *Phonetic* Alphabet; it marks
*phones*, not phonemes.

In general (AIUI), two given phones will receive distinct characters
in the IPA only if they are distinctive phonemes in some languages,
but IPA does not mark up phonemes as such -- since phomes are
language-specific (for example, [s] and [S] are different phonemes in
English which distinguish between e.g. "sheet" and "seat", but are
allophones of the same phoneme in, say, Finnish or Cypriot Greek).

So just because two different sounds have different characters in the
IPA does not mean that they are two different phonemes in the English
language (or in any particular language). And even within English,
different variants have different numbers of phonemes (e.g. "wh" is
phonemic for some people, who distinguish between "which" and "witch",
while others distinguish between "horse" and "hoarse", neither of
which distinction I make; on the other hand, I distinguish between
"cot" and "caught" and between "Mary", "merry", and "marry", something
that not all speakers of English do -- but do not distinguish between
"lore" and "law", something which rhotic speakers, e.g. most
Americans, do).

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

Would anyone in this discussion group be interested in delivering a paper on
Shavian at the Summer Conference on English Spelling in Germany?
http://www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett/spelcon.htm


David and Phil,

I agree that our remarks are not necessarily in opposition.
I was trying to get an explanation of exactly what the IPA position was on
the matter.
The IPA Handbook is on line, I think, so one can go there to answer the
question.
Another good source is a book by Al , English Phonetic Texts.

What is the status of an IPA symbol?
Phil says they represent phones (physical sounds).

I said that when used in a dictionary, the IPA symbols represent phonemes or
sound-categories. Most English dictionaries distinguish /schwa/ and /V/.

I think that relative stress among syllables is phonemic in English.
@, V, @r 3r generally mark stress differences in syllables.

In a particular language, one can say that the phoneme boundaries
mark meaning boundaries and v.v.

Language independent IPA characters, on the other hand, cannot so described.


Dr. David B. Kelley received his degree in linguistics from Indiana
University.
One of his research interests is in historical writing systems.
His languages include Japanese, Chinese, and Korean.
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/6726/websites.htm#Epigraphy
http://www.science-frontiers.com/sfonline.htm


--Steve

-------- David Kelley, hamadavid@... writes:
Steve -- I understand both your and Phil's remarks. His more extensive
comments don't really contradict yours, because IPA does distinguish the
initial vowels in "ado" and "up", whatever they call them -- phonemes or
phones, just as you are doing, with "@" and "V".
...In my idiolect, I just consider them, respectively, short and long
variants (or
allophones) of the same phoneme. And perhaps, that was all that Phil was
trying to point out.

Likewise, the final unstressed vowel in "broken" and
the initial vowel in "in" can, in my particular idiolect, represent the same
"short" and long" variant situation.

So for me, at least. your "@" (i.e. schwa) can represent more than one sound,
and is thus not itself a phoneme.

The differing values of "a" in "ado" and of "e" in "broken", IN MY IDIOLECT,
I just treat as shortened allophones of the "u" in "up" and the "i" in "in".

As Phil mentioned, this doesn't necessarily hold for other varieties of
English. Hope that helps (but it probably only confuses things more). Good
to hear from you. Dave PS I couldn't download the attachment.
austinaccess.com


stbetta@... Ph. 512-302-3014
www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett
retired professor, volunteer literacy instructor
moderator of Saundspel -the phonology forum
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saundspel

Thanks, Philip

Minimal Pair was the exact term I was looking for.

I guess that rather than concern myself with what is the stressed or
accented syllable, which can vary dramatically with different
intonations, I would prefer to determine which Shaw Letter to use
based on Open and Closed Syllables. Open and Closed Syllables can be
easily determined from the syllable boundaries within the word.

In any case,
Words are better represented as a series of syllables, rather than a
unbroken string of Consonant and Vowels.
Most Consonants can't be pronounced stand-alone, in any case.
Interestingly, all the Consonants that can be pronounced Stand-alone
as Syllabic Consonants are members of the Shaw Short Letter Category.
Along with the Short Vowel Letters, it looks like Short Letter can be
differentiate from Tall and Deep letters by another attribute.
The ability to make up a Stand-alone, syllable or word, all on your
own.

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. I do support the necessity to have both Ado and Up by the way.
I find Ado to be much more useful and generally prevalent in English
words, than either of Array/Err.

________________________attached______________________________

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, Philip Newton
<philip.newton@g...> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 07:10:10 -0000, paul vandenbrink
> <pvandenbrink@s...> wrote:
> >
> > P.S. as far as the Array and the Err/Urge sounds go, even tho, I
can
> > hear the difference (more a matter of length and stress than
anything
> > else), I still consider them as one Phoneme.
>
> Yes, they're one phoneme for me, too, just like Ado and Up; for me,
> they differ in stress.
>
> > P.P.S. There is a Linguistic term for such a Pair of words, but I
> > can't recall it at the moment.
>
> "Minimal pairs"?
>
> At least, that's the term I'd use for pairs such as "bat" and "bad"
> which differ only in one phoneme, or "thigh" and "thy" >
> Cheers,
> --
> Philip Newton <philip.newton@g...>

Hi Steve

It is amazing that people can deferentiate such faint differences as
the exact nature or derivation of that faint vowel sound found in the
last syllable of brok-en. I think that this is such a minimal vowel
sound that it scarce exists. In many pronunciations, the last
syllable would be a syllabic "N".
When the vowel sound is so short that it is indistinguishable, lets
just call it an Ado and have done.

Regards, Paul Vandenbrink
P.S. Abstract distinctions like this makes it difficult for anyone
save a Linguist from learning the Shavian Alphabet.
_______________attached____________________________

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, stbetta@a... wrote:
IPA does distinguish the
> initial vowels in "ado" and "up", whatever they call them --
phonemes or
> phones, just as you are doing, with "@" and "V".
> ...In my idiolect, I just consider them, respectively, short and
long
> variants (or
> allophones) of the same phoneme. And perhaps, that was all that
Phil was trying to point out.
>
> Likewise, the final unstressed vowel in "broken" and
> the initial vowel in "in" can, in my particular idiolect, represent
the same "short" and long" variant situation.
>
> So for me, at least. your "@" (i.e. schwa) can represent more than
one sound,
> and is thus not itself a phoneme.
>
> The differing values of "a" in "ado" and of "e" in "broken", IN MY
IDIOLECT,
> I just treat as shortened allophones of the "u" in "up" and the "i"
in "in".
>
> As Phil mentioned, this doesn't necessarily hold for other
varieties of
> English. Hope that helps (but it probably only confuses things
more). Good
> to hear from you. Dave PS I couldn't download the attachment.
> austinaccess.com
>
>
> stbetta@a... Ph. 512-302-3014
> www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett
> retired professor, volunteer literacy instructor
> moderator of Saundspel -the phonology forum
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saundspel

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink" <pvandenbrink@s...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Steve
>
> It is amazing that people can deferentiate such faint differences as
> the exact nature or derivation of that faint vowel sound found in the
> last syllable of brok-en. I think that this is such a minimal vowel
> sound that it scarce exists. In many pronunciations, the last
> syllable would be a syllabic "N".
> When the vowel sound is so short that it is indistinguishable, lets
> just call it an Ado and have done.
>
> Regards, Paul Vandenbrink
> P.S. Abstract distinctions like this makes it difficult for anyone
> save a Linguist from learning the Shavian Alphabet.


That may be why Read specified that syllabic vowels should be indicated this way.
Even if you can tell these sounds apart, the distinction isn't important. At most, this
vowel is an allophone of Ado. I always write an Ado in this position. Isn't this what
was done in Androcles?

Hi Joe
That the main reason that I love the Shavian Alphabet.
Even tho it is 48 Letters, there is certain terseness and economy
that makes it easy to learn and use, once you absorb the internal
logic.
In design it is the very opposite of the I.P.A.
Regards, Paul V.

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" <allegrox_2000@y...> wrote:
> That may be why Read specified that syllabic vowels should be
indicated this way.
> Even if you can tell these sounds apart, the distinction isn't
important. At most, this
> vowel is an allophone of Ado. I always write an Ado in this
position. Isn't this what
> was done in Androcles?