Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

Ethan, Paul, and Joe:

Yes, you can get used to any keyboard map in time.
You have no trouble EIFOV for tradspel AEIOU

EIFOV would not be a problem for kids had they not already been introduced
to AEIOU. Well, it still might be a problem if the parents did not like it.

A keyboard or input device optimized for Shavian sounds like a good idea.
This is taking the re-mapping idea in another direction.

My optimization involved dealing with existing habits and associations.

--Steve

stbetta@... wrote:
> Paul and Joe,

> I am thinking in terms of a universal dictionary key keyboard map that
> would be taught to young children. Most preschoolers have had some
> exposure to the alphabet and many know how to recite their ABC's. Thus,
> AEIOU for the named letters seems to be the place to start rather than E
> I F O jM (V).

Do we have to keep going back to TO for typing in Shavian? I have no
trouble typing (age eat ice oak yew) on keys which just
happen to be labeled EIFOV. It doesn't bother me. I even labeled my
own keys, and you can get key labels that stick on. Label them with the
Shavian letters.
A couple of sites sell custom designed keyboard stickers, there are more
if you search for them:
http://www.hooleon.com/menu-cust-ov.htm
http://aramedia.com/keyboardstickers.htm
If we really had a class in Shavian for youngsters, this might be the way to
go.
The problem is that the kids arrive with some awareness of the letter names.
Are you going to build on these symbol sound correpsondences or try to teach
them a completely different one?
Why can't we just come up with a keyboard layout that's easy to type on
in Shavian, regardless of where the keys are located? The goal is to
make typing easy, not to make it like typing Roman characters on a
qwerty keyboard, which is painful! I personally prefer the Dvorak
layout for Roman characters, since it's optimized for typing. Has
anybody thought out a good Dvorak-like Shavian layout?
Not that I know of. There are of course alternative input devices.
> The issue is how do you get on first base. If we ever want to get more
> than 300 people involved, we have to find a way to get a million or so
> people to use the code.

The current code is quite easy to use, as far as remembering which
letter is which. Nevertheless it uses far too many shifted characters,
which makes it difficult to type. It would be better to put more rarely
used Shavian characters on the shifted positions and the most common
characters on unshifted positions. There are 33 unshifted positions
available on the three main rows of the standard PC keyboard. Provide
people with an easy to use layout, and a source of stickers for the keys
or instructions on how to make their own labels. People are smart, they
can figure it out!

> Any code can be taught and learned, so are closer to known codes.
> Spanglish uses ei ie ai ow yw which is a kind of quasi-Latin symbolism.
> Since Latin is one of the four codes used in traditional written
> English, Spanglish is readable but it is not that close to Spanish. eip,
viesta, ais
> criem, ....
> One could use eep, viista, ais criim in order to be closer to Spanish.
> The DM keyboard is Ep vIsta, Fs krIm, or ais krIm. This is as far away
> from Spanish
> as Spanglish.
>
> --Steve

We're not dealing with Spanish here, but English. How close some
keyboard layout is to a Spanish keyboard is irrelevant to an English
speaker who doesn't use Spanish.
It is not irrelevant if you want them to use the Spanish-Latin-IPA norms.
E I (ai) O U.
Also, it's not easy in a technical way
to create keyboard maps which translate two or more keystrokes into a
single character. Chinese and Japanese have this problem, and it
requires special software (called an input method server) to make it work.

> Hi Steve
> I still like the Shavian ideal of having one letter for every
> commonly recognized sound in English.
> I would'nt even be unhappy to see the Shaw Alphabet expanded to
> include a letter for the WH sound and the Syllabic L sound (i.e.
> girl, table, yellow, owl, furl, ale)
>
> L is available. gRL, tEbL, jelO, qL, fRL, EL.
> I think this is workable. Syllabic L is normally unstressed which makes
> it hard to use R for both the unstressed and stressed /3/.
> Is murder written as mRdR or mRdar? It could be m'RdR

Murder is written , mime-err-dead-array. mRdR,
(mime-are-dead-are)would be pronounced "mardar". Are you using a
different layout? If so, then you are already confusing me!

> where there is rhotic ambiguity.
> Does R represent /3/ or /3r/? It could be either depending on ones
> native accent.
>
> I would like to see a standardized script along with a pronunciation
> guide version.
> I think the default would be the British non-rhotic accent in the
> pronunciation guide
> so if you wanted to represent a rhotic accent you would write m'RrdRr.

I think typing four characters instead of seven is better.
(mxdD). It's simpler, less confusing, easier to type, and takes up less
space. Essentially, that's why Shavian exists.

>
> I am from Texas and was born in the midwest and lived in San Francisco
> as a child.
>
> I also love the Dipthong letters, Yew and Vowel+R compound letters.
> These are very common English sounds, and quite useful.
> I am just suggesting that these generally less common compound
> letters be relegated to the upper case (Capital Letters).
> For example, you quite correctly point out the (x X) key is not well
> served by the assignment of 2 of the less commonly used Shaw Letters.
> (2 Vowel + R sounds) (e+r) & (the stressed er)
> Where there is a useful correspondence, by all means keep the
> current Key Mapping of plain/Capital letters.
> So for example n=> none and N=> hung makes perfect sense.
>
> Would none be written nN or nun?

, nun.

>
> I would like to see some proposals to this effect.
> Unfortunately, I do not see how they can be implemented until
> we are able to represent Shaw letters Directly
> in our discussions/writings.

. ·.
· OS X, · 2000
. ·
.

For those of you who can't see the text above, I wrote:
That is happening. I am using Linux. Some are using Mac OS X, and
others are using Windows 2000 and above. These all are capable of
handling Shavian text directly.

>
> Since most of our writings show up in Roman letters, it is just
> too confusing to sort out the 2 different mapping schemes in actual
> correspondence. Perhaps if we make minimal changes to the non-
> capitalized letter and preserve multiple keys, so there would be
> more redundancy. (i.e. leave lowercase j to represent Yea as well as
> lowercase y)

>
> Regards, Paul V.
>
> If I move the EYE to upper case Y and yea to lower case y.
> Then
> x and X might be better used for Ah and Awe than y and Y.
> Upper case G could be used for the Air sound. I Have to consider an
> Err/Urge replacement key.

Using ASCII encoding to represent Shavian characters (what some here
have termed "Romaji") is obsolete. Unicode will become more and more
prevalent, and as people update their software it will be easier and
easier to use here. If we start using any new encodings for ASCII, we
will cause confusion, break all existing ASCII Shavian font
compatability, and solve nothing. It would be better to focus on
getting your computer to work with Unicode Shavian. Then everybody can
use their favorite keymapping, and everybody else will still be able to
read what they write.

On May 17, 2005, at 3:26 PM, Ethan wrote:

> Do we have to keep going back to TO for typing in Shavian? I have no
> trouble typing 𐑱𐑰𐑲𐑴𐑿 (age eat ice oak yew) on keys which just
> happen to be labeled EIFOV. It doesn't bother me. I even labeled my
> own keys, and you can get key labels that stick on. Label them with the
> Shavian letters.
> A couple of sites sell custom designed keyboard stickers, there are
> more
> if you search for them:
> http://www.hooleon.com/menu-cust-ov.htm
> http://aramedia.com/keyboardstickers.htm

I've been considering doing this myself, but I've been changing around
my layout, and I'm still getting used to Dvorak. I'll probably label
my keys that way before long, though.

> Why can't we just come up with a keyboard layout that's easy to type on
> in Shavian, regardless of where the keys are located? The goal is to
> make typing easy, not to make it like typing Roman characters on a
> qwerty keyboard, which is painful! I personally prefer the Dvorak
> layout for Roman characters, since it's optimized for typing. Has
> anybody thought out a good Dvorak-like Shavian layout?

There is a layout called Dvorak based closely on Roman Dvorak, and
probably the easiest to learn for those of us familiar with that.
Another was created based on the same principles of frequency, but I
haven't tested either as they've only been available for Windows so
far. I'm working on Mac conversions, though.

> The current code is quite easy to use, as far as remembering which
> letter is which. Nevertheless it uses far too many shifted characters,
> which makes it difficult to type. It would be better to put more
> rarely
> used Shavian characters on the shifted positions and the most common
> characters on unshifted positions. There are 33 unshifted positions
> available on the three main rows of the standard PC keyboard. Provide
> people with an easy to use layout, and a source of stickers for the
> keys
> or instructions on how to make their own labels. People are smart,
> they
> can figure it out!

I've never had any problem remembering them. In fact, I still remember
the positions of some of them even after switching to Dvorak. I'm
having a hard time getting used to their new positions, especially for
the rhotic letters, but at least in my case (which is in no way
typical) the arbitrary position of these letters stuck better than
those I associated with Roman letters. I'm not sure if this has
anything to do with anything, but I guess my point is that the two
layouts don't really have to match up.

> We're not dealing with Spanish here, but English. How close some
> keyboard layout is to a Spanish keyboard is irrelevant to an English
> speaker who doesn't use Spanish. Also, it's not easy in a technical
> way
> to create keyboard maps which translate two or more keystrokes into a
> single character. Chinese and Japanese have this problem, and it
> requires special software (called an input method server) to make it
> work.

And using digraphs at all (even just for typing)is silly since it goes
against the very nature of Shavian, and we do have shift keys. That's
not to mention the possibility of ambiguity and the difficulty for
anyone who would want to actually type those letter combinations
without having them replaced automatically.

> Murder is written 𐑥𐑻𐑛𐑼, mime-err-dead-array. mRdR, 𐑥𐑸𐑛𐑸
> (mime-are-dead-are)would be pronounced "mardar". Are you using a
> different layout? If so, then you are already confusing me!

> I think typing four characters instead of seven is better. 𐑥𐑻𐑛𐑼
> (mxdD). It's simpler, less confusing, easier to type, and takes up less
> space. Essentially, that's why Shavian exists

I think the idea suggested was to use 𐑻 (if I may substitute the
correct letter) as the non-rhotic schwer and to add 𐑮 to make it
rhotic. Of course, then we're back to digraphs. And aside from that,
this sound doesn't need a letter since it's never distinguished
phonemically from its rhotic counterpart.

> [snip]

>> Since most of our writings show up in Roman letters, it is just
>> too confusing to sort out the 2 different mapping schemes in
>> actual
>> correspondence. Perhaps if we make minimal changes to the non-
>> capitalized letter and preserve multiple keys, so there would be
>> more redundancy. (i.e. leave lowercase j to represent Yea as well
>> as
>> lowercase y)
>>
>> Regards, Paul V.
>>
>> If I move the EYE to upper case Y and yea to lower case y.
>> Then
>> x and X might be better used for Ah and Awe than y and Y.
>> Upper case G could be used for the Air sound. I Have to consider
>> an
>> Err/Urge replacement key.
>
> Using ASCII encoding to represent Shavian characters (what some here
> have termed "Romaji") is obsolete. Unicode will become more and more
> prevalent, and as people update their software it will be easier and
> easier to use here. If we start using any new encodings for ASCII, we
> will cause confusion, break all existing ASCII Shavian font
> compatability, and solve nothing. It would be better to focus on
> getting your computer to work with Unicode Shavian. Then everybody can
> use their favorite keymapping, and everybody else will still be able to
> read what they write.

Obsolescent, but not gone yet. I agree it's definitely not a good idea
to change the ASCII mapping now, but the suggested mapping changes
could be considered for Unicode layouts.

·𐑡𐑴𐑕𐑧𐑓 𐑕𐑐𐑲𐑕𐑼
Joseph Spicer

See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shawalphabet/files/Keyboard%20Layouts/



My layout is ShavianB (for Birkenhead, as opposed to ShavianD, for
DeMeyere). Shavian can be split exactly in half between vowels and
consonants, so the vowels went on the left side, consonants on the right.
Just like Dvorak, this allows a very healthy hand alternation when typing
English, with the bias on the right hand (unlike QWERTY which is biased
toward the left). I used a 120,000 character analysis to produce the
frequency stats that dictated which letters went on which keys (many common
words can be typed on the home row alone). I then jiggled it about to make
sure common consonant combinations could be typed more comfortably. All the
least used characters are on shift combinations.



I haven't looked at it since last year. Obviously it's a radical departure
from the standard layout that requires complete reeducation so I wanted to
see what people thought of it first.



Hugh B



_____

From: shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com [mailto:shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Joseph Spicer
Sent: 19 May 2005 08:09
To: shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [shawalphabet] New keyboard ideas




On May 17, 2005, at 3:26 PM, Ethan wrote:

Do we have to keep going back to TO for typing in Shavian? I have no
trouble typing ?????????? (age eat ice oak yew) on keys which just
happen to be labeled EIFOV. It doesn't bother me. I even labeled my
own keys, and you can get key labels that stick on. Label them with the
Shavian letters.
A couple of sites sell custom designed keyboard stickers, there are more
if you search for them:
http://www.hooleon.com/menu-cust-ov.htm
http://aramedia.com/keyboardstickers.htm


I've been considering doing this myself, but I've been changing around my
layout, and I'm still getting used to Dvorak. I'll probably label my keys
that way before long, though.

Why can't we just come up with a keyboard layout that's easy to type on
in Shavian, regardless of where the keys are located? The goal is to
make typing easy, not to make it like typing Roman characters on a
qwerty keyboard, which is painful! I personally prefer the Dvorak
layout for Roman characters, since it's optimized for typing. Has
anybody thought out a good Dvorak-like Shavian layout?


There is a layout called Dvorak based closely on Roman Dvorak, and probably
the easiest to learn for those of us familiar with that. Another was created
based on the same principles of frequency, but I haven't tested either as
they've only been available for Windows so far. I'm working on Mac
conversions, though.

The current code is quite easy to use, as far as remembering which
letter is which. Nevertheless it uses far too many shifted characters,
which makes it difficult to type. It would be better to put more rarely
used Shavian characters on the shifted positions and the most common
characters on unshifted positions. There are 33 unshifted positions
available on the three main rows of the standard PC keyboard. Provide
people with an easy to use layout, and a source of stickers for the keys
or instructions on how to make their own labels. People are smart, they
can figure it out!


I've never had any problem remembering them. In fact, I still remember the
positions of some of them even after switching to Dvorak. I'm having a hard
time getting used to their new positions, especially for the rhotic letters,
but at least in my case (which is in no way typical) the arbitrary position
of these letters stuck better than those I associated with Roman letters.
I'm not sure if this has anything to do with anything, but I guess my point
is that the two layouts don't really have to match up.

We're not dealing with Spanish here, but English. How close some
keyboard layout is to a Spanish keyboard is irrelevant to an English
speaker who doesn't use Spanish. Also, it's not easy in a technical way
to create keyboard maps which translate two or more keystrokes into a
single character. Chinese and Japanese have this problem, and it
requires special software (called an input method server) to make it work.


And using digraphs at all (even just for typing)is silly since it goes
against the very nature of Shavian, and we do have shift keys. That's not to
mention the possibility of ambiguity and the difficulty for anyone who would
want to actually type those letter combinations without having them replaced
automatically.

Murder is written ????????, mime-err-dead-array. mRdR, ????????
(mime-are-dead-are)would be pronounced "mardar". Are you using a
different layout? If so, then you are already confusing me!



I think typing four characters instead of seven is better. ????????
(mxdD). It's simpler, less confusing, easier to type, and takes up less
space. Essentially, that's why Shavian exists


I think the idea suggested was to use ?? (if I may substitute the correct
letter) as the non-rhotic schwer and to add ?? to make it rhotic. Of course,
then we're back to digraphs. And aside from that, this sound doesn't need a
letter since it's never distinguished phonemically from its rhotic
counterpart.

[snip]



Since most of our writings show up in Roman letters, it is just
too confusing to sort out the 2 different mapping schemes in actual
correspondence. Perhaps if we make minimal changes to the non-
capitalized letter and preserve multiple keys, so there would be
more redundancy. (i.e. leave lowercase j to represent Yea as well as
lowercase y)

Regards, Paul V.

If I move the EYE to upper case Y and yea to lower case y.
Then
x and X might be better used for Ah and Awe than y and Y.
Upper case G could be used for the Air sound. I Have to consider an
Err/Urge replacement key.


Using ASCII encoding to represent Shavian characters (what some here
have termed "Romaji") is obsolete. Unicode will become more and more
prevalent, and as people update their software it will be easier and
easier to use here. If we start using any new encodings for ASCII, we
will cause confusion, break all existing ASCII Shavian font
compatability, and solve nothing. It would be better to focus on
getting your computer to work with Unicode Shavian. Then everybody can
use their favorite keymapping, and everybody else will still be able to
read what they write.


Obsolescent, but not gone yet. I agree it's definitely not a good idea to
change the ASCII mapping now, but the suggested mapping changes could be
considered for Unicode layouts.

.?????????? ??????????
Joseph Spicer

hF /dSep

Taoism (The Way) eventually did became absorbed into Confucusism.
Yin and Yang. Opposites.
But There is a lot of insight in Taoism.
I would consider it a religion, tho.
I checked the internet.
Here is a summary.

The Tao te Ching was written in a time of feudal warfare and
constant conflict. Lao Tzu was reflecting on a way which would stop
the warfare, a realistic path for humanity to follow which would end
the conflict. And so he came up with a few pages of short but
enlightening verses, which became the Tao Te Ching. This is the
original book of Tao.
one of the better-known phrases from the Tao Te Ching is, "I am good
to the man who is good to me, likewise, I am also good to the bad
man." Literally, this sentence would read, "The good man, I good
him. The bad man, I good him too."
Yet, a Taoist is not precisely a pacifist. He will take military
action when he has not seen far enough ahead to prevent the need for
violence in the first place. When violence is needed, the Taoist
leader will fight until he has achieved his goal, and then stop,
saddened, but resolved to foresee better in the future.
The first sentence,of the Tao Te Ching, is usually translated
as, "The Tao that can be named is not the true Tao."

When a book claims to describe something, paradoxical, infinite,
beyond human knowledge, I consider it to be a religous work.
Religion helps us to understand our limitations.
Our knowledge is finite, but the universe is infinite.
Important stuff.

bUt kIp in mFnd HAt,
F am an FdIalist datDmind t kunvins Yl
/iNgliS spIkiN pIpal t Vz H /SYvIan Alfabet.

F pUt asFd mF raliJus balIfs
n kynsantrEt yn hwAt iz rASanal n lyJakal.
inkymplIt HO it mE bI.

rigRdz, /PYl /vI.

pI. es. F dM enJq H pOatrI v it Yl.
***************************attached******************************
--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "dshepx" <dshep@g...> wrote:
> dao/Tao (The way) is a whirling emptiness,
> yet when used cannot be exhausted.
> Out of this mysterious well
> flows everything in existence.
>
> > I think this is a good example of Religous
> > Hyperbole.
>
> Hyperbole? well, perhaps. But imaginative
> hyperbole can be preferable to inflexible
> dogma, or so it seems to me. If I am not
> mistaken I believe the Chinese regard
> Daoism as a necessary counterpart (or
> counterweight) and corrective to the
> rigidities of Confucianism. Something
> like that anyway.
>
> Keep in mind that,
>
> *****************
>
> Az F prazent from tFm tM tFm salektad bits
> from Ha /dQ F dM sO Onli tM entDtEn, nevD
> tM prosalitFz; indId, F kUd not Ivan if F
> wontad tM -- mF noliJ ov /dQ, Yr fYr Hat
> mAtD eni raliJan iz sMpDfiSal At best.
>
> if V rakYl, F YlwEz inklMd a nOt tM HAt afekt.
> basFdz, Fm not At Yl SUr HAt /dQ iz a raliJan,
> mOr lFk a falosafi, Yr pOatri. ramenbD, V kAn
> anJQ Ha pOamz ov /syfO wiHQt eni dazFr tM
> bakum a lezbian.
>
> dSep

As there appears to be a bit of a doldrums
just now, it is Spring after all, and why sit
in front of a computer screen when you
could be outside enjoying nature, and the
current discussion is about keyboard
mapping, I offer this as an alternative.
Not a suggestion for change necessarily,
just an alternative to be considered.

If we are serious about enticing more people
to join us in this admittedly Quixotic effort to
introduce an alternative (and more rational)
alphabet in which to write English, why not
meet everyone else halfway and use what was
once (and may still be) the standard method
of introducing the various sounds of English
to children?

I refer specifically to the old, unfashionable,
even outmoded, system that defined vowels
as either short or long in the peculiarly English
fashion (finding a way of mapping vowels is
the problem, is it not, as the consonants pretty
much take care of themselves).

Personally, I am happy with a system based
upon the IPA. But I am familiar with this method
— I have taken the trouble to learn it and can
read without difficulty anything written, or
transliterated, in IPA notation. I suspect however
that most people are not, and will not bother to
take the time to do so. Why not then build upon
what people may perhaps remember from their
early schooling, the traditional, uncomplicated
sound definitions?

Yes, I know this is different from Read's system,
based upon that of the IPA. But the IPA's system
(which I like, let me repeat), is based upon
continental sound values, that is, French, German,
and ultimately, Latin — it is, after all, the product
of the "International" Phonetic Association. Shavian
however is meant to convey English, and English
only, and therefore could conform to earlier English
practice without detriment, perhaps even advantage.

What does this mean in practice? (remember, this is
for mapping purposes only, nothing else changes:

sounds mapping position

vowels proposed current

short/long lower case/upper case

ash/ace a/A A/E
egg/east e/E e/I
it/ice i/I i/F
ox/oak o/O o/O
book/boot u/U U/M
up/ought y/Y u/Y


So far we are still within the old school injunction
that vowels are AEIOU and sometimes Y.

This leaves the most common vowel sound of all
to be assigned a position, namely the schwa, and
this could be `x', easily accessible by the little f
inger of the left hand on a qwerty keyboard. As
complement, X could be `ah', the vowel sound of
`father', which in the speech of many and perhaps
most people is a lower-mid vowel (the schwa is a
central mid-vowel).

ago/ah x/X a/y

The advantage, if any, of the above system is that
all short or lax vowels are lower-case letters, all
long or tense vowels are upper case in their natural
English version, something easy to remember. The
disadvantage is that it is at odds with the IPA
system. Which is the more important?

To continue, the diphthongs of `bout' and `boil'
could remain the same as before, though if one
were changing all anyway I should reverse the
q/Q order as `out' sounds are more common I
believe than `oil' sounds.

out/oil q/Q Q/q

Then comes the problem of assigning something
logical to the compound sounds, the r-altered
vowels. This will be the most troublesome as there
are simply not enough keys on a standard keyboard
to accommodate in a self-evident fashion these
sounds; some arbitrary designation is unavoidable.

In order to do this let us now assign, or rather
confirm, positions for the consonants and remove
them from consideration.

The letters p, b, t, d, k, g (hard), h, f, v, s, z,
l, r, m, n, and w use their normal lower case position;
no change or controversy there.

Neither should there be with S for `sure', and Z for
`measure'. Perhaps though, to continue the analogy,
`church', as a complex consonant, should be C, as
`judge' is upper case J.

The nasal `ng' remains N, and `yea' as j: the latter
of course is a departure from what would be normal
in English, but the `y' was needed for a vowel, so here
we must adhere to IPA practice.

Then there are `thin' and `then', at present
represented by T and H. It could be argued however
that the latter should instead be D as being more
closely related to its respective sound. Therefore:

sounds mapping position

consonants proposed present


peep/bib same p/b
tot/deed same t/d
kick/gag same k/g
fief/verve same f/v
thin/then T/D T/H
sauce/zoos same s/z
shoe/measure same S/Z
church/judge C/J c/J
yea/woe same j/w
hope/hang same h/N
lull/roar same l/r
mime/none same m/n


And now for the complex vowels for which
Read devised letters: are, or, air, err, array,
ear, ian, yew (he neglected to provide letters
to indicate the compound vowels of `poor'
and `fire'). Apart from R for `are' (oral similarity)
and D for `array' (graphical resemblence), these
mappings are of necessity arbitrary and not
self-evident — we've run out of suitable keys.
But perhaps a better arrangement can be
found using familar keywords, for example:

sound mapping position

complex vowels proposed present

pARk/fORk P/F R/P
bARe/hER B/H X/x
ARray/gEAR R/G D/C
IAn/YEW K/V W/V

These are almost as arbitrary as the existing positions,
but at least are all now upper case, and have relatively
easy-to-remember alternate keywords.

W can be reserved for the consonant cluster in hwat,
and for additional complex vowels, L for that in liar,
M for moor, D for door.

To sum up:

sounds mapping position

consonants proposed current

peep/bib same p/b
tot/deed same t/d
kick/gag same k/g
fief/verve same f/v
thin/then T/D T/H
sauce/zoos same s/z
shush/measure same S/Z
church/judge C/J c/J
yea/woe same j/w
hope/hang same h/N
lull/roar same l/r
mime/none same m/n

vowels proposed current

short/long lower case/upper case

ash/ace a/A A/E
egg/east e/E e/I
it/ice i/I i/F
ox/oak o/O o/O
book/boot u/U U/M
up/ought y/Y u/Y
ago/ah x/X a/y
out/oil q/Q Q/q

complex vowels proposed current

pARk/fORk P/F R/P
bARe/hER B/H X/x
ARray/gEAR R/G D/C
IAn/YEW K/V W/V

WHat W hw
dOOR/mOOR D/M Or/Mr
lIAR L Far

namer dot c G or /

This uses all 48 lower and upper case letters.


Again, to avoid the generation of displeasure,
this proposal is not something I necessarily
consider an improvement of the present order,
based as it is upon IPA dispositions. The IPA
method of vowel definition is a good system,
in my opinion. It is merely a suggestion that
might, possibly, render Shavian easier to learn
and digest for newcomers, especially those
indifferent to linguistics, building as it does
upon prior, intuitive understanding of English
sounds, the old tried-and-true long and short
vowel definitions of former days, one that does
not require any knowledge of how the IPA
mandates vowel definition.

This could be more important in America than
elsewhere, where IPA recommendations may
not be as widely known (or appreciated). The
OED began using IPA symbols as explanatory
symbols several decades ago, and so, presumably,
an entire generation in Britain may now be
accustomed to this method of defining sound.
American dictionaries however have resisted,
and prefer their traditional methods of explanation
using a variety of superscripts and re-spellings
based upon a more, arguably natural identification
of sounds in common words, one that ultimately
rests upon the old long and short distinction of
specifically English vowels.

So, there you are. The best need not be the
enemy of the good. If more people can be made
aware that Shavian makes sense, is not that difficult
to learn, and does not require any special knowledge
other than what most people already possess, then
something could be accomplished.

dshep

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com,

"dshepx"

tried but failed in his effort to show a few
neatly spaced tables illustrating an alternative
mapping system; everything just ran together.

The Yahoo interface page does not allow
tabulations. How does one present anything
that requires spacing in a clear manner?

Perplexed.

> "dshepx"
>
> tried but failed in his effort to show a few
> neatly spaced tables illustrating an alternative
> mapping system; everything just ran together.

Looked more-or-less all right to me in my text email client. (Though some of
the spacing was off since Outlook, in its infinite wisdom, puts tabs every
six columns rather than every eight like most other programs.)

> The Yahoo interface page does not allow
> tabulations. How does one present anything
> that requires spacing in a clear manner?

Put it on a web page, I suppose, and link to it from the email.

Cheers,
Philip

Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
> See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shawalphabet/files/Keyboard%20Layouts/
>
>
>
> My layout is ShavianB (for Birkenhead, as opposed to ShavianD, for
> DeMeyere). Shavian can be split exactly in half between vowels and
> consonants, so the vowels went on the left side, consonants on the
> right. Just like Dvorak, this allows a very healthy hand alternation
> when typing English, with the bias on the right hand (unlike QWERTY
> which is biased toward the left). I used a 120,000 character analysis to
> produce the frequency stats that dictated which letters went on which
> keys (many common words can be typed on the home row alone). I then
> jiggled it about to make sure common consonant combinations could be
> typed more comfortably. All the least used characters are on shift
> combinations.
>
>
>
> I haven’t looked at it since last year. Obviously it’s a radical
> departure from the standard layout that requires complete reeducation so
> I wanted to see what people thought of it first.
>
>
>
> Hugh B
𐑲 𐑡𐑳𐑕𐑑 𐑓𐑬𐑯𐑛 𐑘𐑹 𐑤𐑱𐑬𐑑 𐑘𐑧𐑕𐑑𐑼𐑛𐑱, 𐑯 𐑣𐑨𐑝𐑯𐑑 𐑣𐑨𐑛
𐑩 𐑗𐑨𐑯𐑕 𐑑 𐑑𐑮𐑲 𐑦𐑑 𐑬𐑑 𐑘𐑧𐑑. 𐑲 𐑯𐑰𐑛 𐑑 𐑥𐑪𐑛𐑦𐑓𐑲 𐑩
𐑥𐑨𐑐𐑓𐑲𐑤 𐑓𐑹 𐑦𐑑, 𐑞𐑧𐑯 𐑲𐑤 𐑚𐑰 𐑱𐑚𐑤 𐑑 𐑑𐑧𐑤 𐑣𐑬 𐑢𐑧𐑤
𐑦𐑑 𐑢𐑻𐑒𐑕. 𐑲𐑤 𐑤𐑧𐑑 𐑿 𐑯𐑴 𐑢𐑳𐑑 𐑦𐑑 𐑓𐑰𐑤𐑟 𐑤𐑲𐑒.

I just found your layout yesterday, and I haven't had a chance to try it
out yet. I will need to modify a mapfile for it, then I'll be able to
tell how well it works. I'll let you know what it feels like.
--
𐑰𐑔𐑩𐑯 - Ethan

hF /dSep

You are quite right.
There is some internal consistency in the Traditional English way
of setting out the vowels. Although the organization is not logical
from a phonetical standpoint, it does cover most of the bases.
I think it has an evolved over time to minimize diagraphs in the
original pronunciation of traditional English words. Foreign Loan
words are borrowed along with their foreign spelling, so they are
inconsistent. And Who wants to get into Etymology (historical
derivation of words) in order to figure out how to spell a word.
But instead of thinking of it as only Long and Short sounds.
I like to think of it as Long, Short and Vowel Name Sounds.
In a few cases I throw in the Dipthong, when it is not already in use
as a name. There is a little redundancy, but you can see the whole
Vowel picture.

Name Short Long Dipthong

A(Ace) ash baa Ice
E(East) egg Ace
I(Ice) it east Ian
O(Oak) oak Oil
(ah/on) ah/ox awe/ought Out
U(Yew) ooze/boot
00 book boot

And if you add in x as the Schwa
x Ado up
Voila. All the Basic English sounds are there.
rIgRdz, /pYl /vI.

P.S. It is good that you recognise Double-O (OO) as a seperate Vowel
letter. And I like using x for Schwa, and X for Up sound.
___________________attached________________________________

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, "dshepx" <dshep@g...> wrote:
> If we are serious about enticing more people
> to join us in this admittedly Quixotic effort to
> introduce an alternative (and more rational)
> alphabet in which to write English, why not
> meet everyone else halfway and use what was
> once (and may still be) the standard method
> of introducing the various sounds of English
> to children?
>
> I refer specifically to the old, unfashionable,
> even outmoded, system that defined vowels
> as either short or long in the peculiarly English
> fashion (finding a way of mapping vowels is
> the problem, is it not, as the consonants pretty
> much take care of themselves).
>
Why not then build upon
> what people may perhaps remember from their
> early schooling, the traditional, uncomplicated
> sound definitions?
>
> Yes, I know this is different from Read's system,
> based upon that of the IPA. But the IPA's system
> (which I like, let me repeat), is based upon
> continental sound values, that is, French, German,
> and ultimately, Latin — it is, after all, the product
> of the "International" Phonetic Association. Shavian
> however is meant to convey English, and English
> only, and therefore could conform to earlier English
> practice without detriment, perhaps even advantage.
>
> What does this mean in practice? (remember, this is
> for mapping purposes only, nothing else changes:
>
> sounds mapping position
>
> vowels proposed current
>
> short/long lower case/upper case
>
> ash/ace a/A A/E
> egg/east e/E e/I
> it/ice i/I i/F
> ox/oak o/O o/O

> book/boot u/U U/M
> up/ought y/Y u/Y
>
>
> So far we are still within the old school injunction
> that vowels are AEIOU and sometimes Y.
>
> This leaves the most common vowel sound of all
> to be assigned a position, namely the schwa, and
> this could be `x', easily accessible by the little f
> inger of the left hand on a qwerty keyboard. As
> complement, X could be `ah', the vowel sound of
> `father', which in the speech of many and perhaps
> most people is a lower-mid vowel (the schwa is a
> central mid-vowel).
>
> ago/ah x/X a/y
>

For those of you who would like a keyboard
without letters, here you are
(from the New York Times):

..........................................


A Keyboard That Lets the Supremely Confident Show Disdain for Qwerty

By ANDREW ZIPERN

Published: May 26, 2005

In the programming world, only the strong survive. But what about
the smug? A new
product, Das Keyboard, seems to have both in mind. It's a regular
104-key keyboard -
except that nothing is printed on the keys.

"It's really for geeks," said Daniel Guermeur, the creator. "They can
already touch-type
without looking. They feel a little bit superior. The keyboard is a
statement."

Mr. Guermeur, a 41-year-old programmer and the chief executive of the
Metadot
Corporation, an open-source software company in Austin, Tex., has
been using a
prototype model for two years. His company claims that some users,
forced to memorize
key positions, can type twice as fast within a few weeks.

Das Keyboard also has one feature not found in most keyboards. Each
key is weighted by
location to be more or less resistant to touch. For example, it takes
less force to make the
Z key register than it does the F.

The keyboard is on sale at www.daskeyboard.com for $79.95, and the
site makes no
bones about the target market: "A keyboard with no inscriptions on
the keys was obviously
only for a certain type of geek, not just normal ones, only those who
are above the pack:
the übergeeks."

.........................

Any übergeeks out there?

dshep