Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

Paul and Phil,'

I am all in favor of coming up with a writing system that will bridge
dialects.

Maybe I am a little dense but I just don't see how ligatures do the trick.

It only works if you have some ambiguous symbols. You have to say that D can
be interpreted as either @ or @r.

If you do this, then you could also say that the component symbols in D can
be
ambiguous. e.g., An r after a schwa in an unstressed terminal can be ignored.

What are the other options?

In PMF I have a symbol a which is used as schwer /@`/ and the syllabic r but
is defined as a schwa.

So words are written in a non-rhotic dialect but it looks rhotic. other = ^ða

The ShawSans2.ttf has to be installed to view. It looks like Lambda-
crossed D- r

(PMF steals quite a few of Read's letter forms but gives them more Romic
interpretations).
www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett/pictography.htm

--Steve
Hi Steve
I strongly support Philip in this matter, the Rhotic Shaw Letters,
allow Shaw writers from England, and the rest of the Commonwealth to
retain a strong semblense that they are writing the same language as
the Americans.
It effectively bridges that great Rhotic/Non-Rhotic English divide.
Let's not abandon any bridges before we know where we have to get to.

Regards, Paul V.
P.S. Thanks Phil. Right on.
P.P.S. Many of these Rhotic letters are very common. They keep number
of letters used tight.

Paul,

You need to have four syllabics, RLMN
In Shavian, R is already assigned to /är/

Girl = /'g&r (-&) l/ according to Webster. /g3`l/ in IPA
Pencil = /pen-s (&) l/

--Steve

Hi Steve
Good point. I agree with you in this suggestion.
A syllabic "l" letter would be very useful addition to the Shavian
Alphabet. It could be mapped as Capital -L.
We a syllabic R in the letter Array. Why not one for the L sound.
Very useful to write girl, table, oil, jewel, general, tunnel.

Hi Scott
While I would prefer a single letter, you do seem to be confusing
the 2 different pronunciations.
Perhaps we can agree onanother of list of words where the sounds
actually do seem to be different.
You can check on Dictionary.com
1. ? = urge, term, firm, word, heard, gird, bird, stirred, turn, earn,
nervous
2. er = butter, murder, girder, murmur, further, gangster, talker,
Earl, or (er)angatan, earth, urbane, surfer, murmur, water, corner

Don't you find it interesting that most cases of sound 1, occur in
closed syllables?

Regards, Paul V.

--- In shawalphabet@...m, stbetta@a... wrote:
> Paul, Joe, and others,
>
> The options are either to merge the two sounds /3/ and /@/ as in a
Webster
> notation
> &r'bAn, '&rban, &'rang&tang, 's&rf&r
> or we find key words that keeps them distinct as in the IPA.
> urbane urban
orangatang
> surfer
> @r'beIn DbEn, '3rb@n xban, @'rang@tang arANgatAn, 's3rf@r
sxfD
>
> As indicated by other writers, some of Read's choices for key words
do not
> work.
> &-'rA <array> works for schwa, but not with schwa+r because the r
is in the
> next syllable.
>
> Read was probably searching for a word that would be pronounced the
same by
> both
> rhotic and non-rhotic speakers. To do this the written r has to be
followed
> by a vowel.
> <butter on toast> might work but <butter> /'bVt@/ alone does not.
>
> Proposed New key words
> schwa - unstressed mid lax vowel: ago rather than ado /&'dü/
> schwa+r - unstressed. urbane or urgent rather than array
>
> stressed sound in up: up is fine
> unstressed and stressed sound: abut
>
> stressed and unstressed schwa+r (rhotic dialect) surfer murder,
murmur,
> herder
>
> Other suggestions welcomed.
>
> --Steve
>
> wurdbendur@g... writes:
> > Hi Joe
> >
> > I can think of lots of names for this sound.
> > Ergo, irksome, orangutan, early, Earl, Irving, ermine, Ursila,
> > urgent.
>
> The problem with those is that most of them are stressed and should
be
> spelled with x rather than D.
> The word ?œorangutan??could work if you spell it DXNgatAn, but the
a should
> actually be in a separate syllable here. This is the problem with
most of the
> words suggested for this ligature. As for the other words, I would
spell them
> as such: xgO, xksam, xli, xl, xviN, xmin, xsila, xJent.
>
> > urbane is better than Urban. Much better than a-rray
> > There must be others.
>
> Probably. I just can?™t think of any. The word we?™re looking for
will
> probably start with a vowel + R + another consonant in T.O.
>
> Steve T. Bett
> Austin, Texas
>
> www.foolswisdom.com/~sbett

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 13:28:33 EST, stbetta@... <stbetta@...> wrote:
>
> Phil,

Please don't call me Phil; I prefer Philip.

> You said that the keyboard map should be ignored. Now you say you like it
> because it permits you to write "mother" without using an R.

Er, no. I like *Shavian*; the keyboard map is indeed irrelevant.

And one feature of Shavian that I like is that it lets me represent my
speech in a way that will also represent other people's speech.

Specifically, I can spell "mother" the same way that an American (to
generalise: rhotic = US, non-rhotic = UK, though that's obviously not
true foo everyone) would.

The way this works is with the rhotic "ligature" letters -- which
Shavian (the way I understand it) treats not as ligatures of letters
(though that is undoubtedly where they are derived from) but as single
letters in their own right.

> There is no major non-rhotic problem with writing mother as muHar muHar
> You just interpret <ar> as /a/ unless it comes before a vowel.

Which means that the writing system is no longer phonemic, since you
have "silent" letters again. This goes against the goals of the Shaw
alphabet, and you're back in the realm of things such as "doubt",
"know", or "gave" (to exaggerate a little).

I prefer the version of Shavian I learned, which does not have silent
letters. The letter "roar" is always pronounced as /r/, not sometimes
/r/ and sometimes silent.

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

I'm using Microsoft Entourage since I can’t use HTML from web mail. You’ll
have to enable POP mail from GMail first. I had a hard time getting it to
work, but Google has step-by-step instructions for various clients if
necessary. And once you get it all set up, the HTML should work fine.

I’m curious to know how many people will be able to use Shavian in their
email. If the majority of us can, then we can actually have our
conversations in Shavian as well as about it.

And if anybody doesn’t have POP access, I presently have six GMail
invitations to give away.


On 1/16/05 8:26 AM, "Philip Newton" <philip.newton@...> wrote:

>
> On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 15:21:13 -0500, Joe <wurdbendur@...> wrote:
>> F sxtanli hOp His wil wxk. :p
>> 𐑲 𐑕𐑻𐑑𐑩𐑯𐑤𐑦 𐑣𐑴𐑐 𐑞𐑦𐑕 𐑢𐑦𐑤 𐑢𐑻𐑒.
>> :𐑐
>
> I could read both of those lines in your original message.
>
> How do you write HTML with Gmail, though?
>
> Cheers,

Philip,

I have had Unifon writers who say they write in display Unifon and ignore the
keyboard map. In fact, they cannot even interpret the keyboard map. I think
this is similar to your point about keyboard Shavian.

An ambiguous phonogram is not a silent letter. It is just a soundsign that
is mapped to two sounds. It is not ambiguous within a language community since
everyone in that community assigns one sound to the symbol.

This is a departure from the ideal, one sound per symbol system, and would be
a slight reduction in phonemicity. However, there is no ambiguity within a
regional dialect since they all interpret the ambiguous character the same way.

In New Zealand, there is not hesitation when you ask someone to pronounce
CORT,
It is the same as <caught> in General American. <or> = /O/.

As you are using D, it is an ambiguous phonogram. You may pronounce D without
an R. I will pronounce it with an R.



> You said that the keyboard map should be ignored. Now you say you like it
> because it permits you to write "mother" without using an R.

Er, no. I like *Shavian*; the keyboard map is indeed irrelevant.

And one feature of Shavian that I like is that it lets me represent my
speech in a way that will also represent other people's speech.

Specifically, I can spell "mother" the same way that an American (to
generalise: rhotic = US, non-rhotic = UK, though that's obviously not
true foo everyone) would.

The way this works is with the rhotic "ligature" letters -- which
Shavian (the way I understand it) treats not as ligatures of letters
(though that is undoubtedly where they are derived from) but as single
letters in their own right.
I agree that D is a letter the same way that X is a letter.
D=a/ar, X = ks/gz....


> SB: There is no major non-rhotic problem with writing mother as muHar
muHar
> You just interpret <ar> as /a/ unless it comes before a vowel.

Which means that the writing system is no longer phonemic, since you
have "silent" letters again. This goes against the goals of the Shaw
alphabet, and you're back in the realm of things such as "doubt",
"know", or "gave" (to exaggerate a little).

I prefer the version of Shavian I learned, which does not have silent
letters. The letter "roar" is always pronounced as /r/, not sometimes
/r/ and sometimes silent.
You need to transcribe ROAR. I don't think you pronounce the R is the 3rd
transcription

roar = rOr roUr, r&Ur, ror rOr rYr rP
rawer = ro&r
rower = rO-@r roU-@r rOwP

--Steve

This is a rather pointless discussion.



Shavian has "array" for writing the schwer. It works perfectly and I fully
agree with Philip's point that it allows both accent groups to use the same
letter without necessarily pronouncing it the same. Is there any need to
discuss removing it? Besides, removing it would INCREASE the amount of
letters used to write words, thus negating Shaw's wish for greater economy
in writing.



Hugh B



_____

From: stbetta@... [mailto:stbetta@...]
Sent: 16 January 2005 21:43
To: shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [shawalphabet] keyboard map for shavian



Philip,


I have had Unifon writers who say they write in display Unifon and ignore
the keyboard map. In fact, they cannot even interpret the keyboard map. I
think this is similar to your point about keyboard Shavian.



An ambiguous phonogram is not a silent letter. It is just a soundsign that
is mapped to two sounds. It is not ambiguous within a language community
since everyone in that community assigns one sound to the symbol.



This is a departure from the ideal, one sound per symbol system, and would
be a slight reduction in phonemicity. However, there is no ambiguity within
a regional dialect since they all interpret the ambiguous character the same
way.



In New Zealand, there is not hesitation when you ask someone to pronounce
CORT,

It is the same as <caught> in General American. <or> = /O/.



As you are using D, it is an ambiguous phonogram. You may pronounce D
without an R. I will pronounce it with an R.







> You said that the keyboard map should be ignored. Now you say you like it
> because it permits you to write "mother" without using an R.

Er, no. I like *Shavian*; the keyboard map is indeed irrelevant.

And one feature of Shavian that I like is that it lets me represent my
speech in a way that will also represent other people's speech.

Specifically, I can spell "mother" the same way that an American (to
generalise: rhotic = US, non-rhotic = UK, though that's obviously not
true foo everyone) would.

The way this works is with the rhotic "ligature" letters -- which
Shavian (the way I understand it) treats not as ligatures of letters
(though that is undoubtedly where they are derived from) but as single
letters in their own right.

I agree that D is a letter the same way that X is a letter.
D=a/ar, X = ks/gz....





> SB: There is no major non-rhotic problem with writing mother as muHar
muHar
> You just interpret <ar> as /a/ unless it comes before a vowel.

Which means that the writing system is no longer phonemic, since you
have "silent" letters again. This goes against the goals of the Shaw
alphabet, and you're back in the realm of things such as "doubt",
"know", or "gave" (to exaggerate a little).

I prefer the version of Shavian I learned, which does not have silent
letters. The letter "roar" is always pronounced as /r/, not sometimes
/r/ and sometimes silent.

You need to transcribe ROAR. I don't think you pronounce the R is the 3rd
transcription

roar = rOr roUr, r&Ur, ror rOr rYr rP
rawer = ro&r
rower = rO-@r roU-@r rOwP

--Steve



_____

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.

Philip Newton wrote:

> I think Scott Harrison prefers the Unicode approach, and I do, too --
> then you could just type "??????????" in plain text without needing to
> fake the appearance through a font. However, not everyone can read or
> write that.

As much as I agree with your wish to use the proper system... I have the
latest version of MS Outlook, on the latest version of Windows with the most
recent upgrades. It still can't make sense of the characters. We can moan at
Microsoft for being incompetent, but that won't change the fact that
virtually nobody here can read Unicode Shavian. :(

At least we can understand each other, even if it is via a 'crude' method
such as the fonts we currently use.

Hugh

hM iz Ebal t rId His?



if V kAn, riplF in /SEvWn!



:)



/hV /b

How very true, Hugh. Both the Schwa and the schwer are necessary, since
english speakers naturally will not fully pronounce the unstressed
vowel or vowel+r there by creating a need for an "un-vowel." Taking it
away would both slow transcription as we tried to decide what vowel to
use to replace the schwa and it would slow comprension. In TO, the
hardest thing for children to learn is how to read the emphasis and
stress in a new word, yet by the time we are adults, we have seen most
words before and have developed the "rhythm" of speech in our reading
(though there are a few adults I have met who still do not read aloud
with any confidence, which I can only attribute to a "word-method" of
learning to read and a lack of confidence in reading aloud at all).

Yes, both the schwa and up have a place in shavian, if we hope to
fulfill Shaw's dream of an alphabet to truly represent the sounds of
english.

--Star

--- Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@...> wrote:

> This is a rather pointless discussion.
>
>
>
> Shavian has "array" for writing the schwer. It works perfectly and I
> fully
> agree with Philip's point that it allows both accent groups to use
> the same
> letter without necessarily pronouncing it the same. Is there any need
> to
> discuss removing it? Besides, removing it would INCREASE the amount
> of
> letters used to write words, thus negating Shaw's wish for greater
> economy
> in writing.
>
>
>
> Hugh B
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: stbetta@... [mailto:stbetta@...]
> Sent: 16 January 2005 21:43
> To: shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [shawalphabet] keyboard map for shavian
>
>
>
> Philip,
>
>
> I have had Unifon writers who say they write in display Unifon and
> ignore
> the keyboard map. In fact, they cannot even interpret the keyboard
> map. I
> think this is similar to your point about keyboard Shavian.
>
>
>
> An ambiguous phonogram is not a silent letter. It is just a
> soundsign that
> is mapped to two sounds. It is not ambiguous within a language
> community
> since everyone in that community assigns one sound to the symbol.
>
>
>
> This is a departure from the ideal, one sound per symbol system, and
> would
> be a slight reduction in phonemicity. However, there is no ambiguity
> within
> a regional dialect since they all interpret the ambiguous character
> the same
> way.
>
>
>
> In New Zealand, there is not hesitation when you ask someone to
> pronounce
> CORT,
>
> It is the same as <caught> in General American. <or> = /O/.
>
>
>
> As you are using D, it is an ambiguous phonogram. You may pronounce D
> without an R. I will pronounce it with an R.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > You said that the keyboard map should be ignored. Now you say you
> like it
> > because it permits you to write "mother" without using an R.
>
> Er, no. I like *Shavian*; the keyboard map is indeed irrelevant.
>
> And one feature of Shavian that I like is that it lets me represent
> my
> speech in a way that will also represent other people's speech.
>
> Specifically, I can spell "mother" the same way that an American (to
> generalise: rhotic = US, non-rhotic = UK, though that's obviously not
> true foo everyone) would.
>
> The way this works is with the rhotic "ligature" letters -- which
> Shavian (the way I understand it) treats not as ligatures of letters
> (though that is undoubtedly where they are derived from) but as
> single
> letters in their own right.
>
> I agree that D is a letter the same way that X is a letter.
> D=a/ar, X = ks/gz....
>
>
>
>
>
> > SB: There is no major non-rhotic problem with writing mother as
> muHar
> muHar
> > You just interpret <ar> as /a/ unless it comes before a vowel.
>
> Which means that the writing system is no longer phonemic, since you
> have "silent" letters again. This goes against the goals of the Shaw
> alphabet, and you're back in the realm of things such as "doubt",
> "know", or "gave" (to exaggerate a little).
>
> I prefer the version of Shavian I learned, which does not have silent
> letters. The letter "roar" is always pronounced as /r/, not sometimes
> /r/ and sometimes silent.
>
> You need to transcribe ROAR. I don't think you pronounce the R is
> the 3rd
> transcription
>
> roar = rOr roUr, r&Ur, ror rOr rYr rP
> rawer = ro&r
> rower = rO-@r roU-@r rOwP
>
> --Steve
>
>
>
> _____
>
> 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.
>
>


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

Numfar! Do the Dance of Joy!



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250