------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/GSaulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: Orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization etc)
From: Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: The Grammar of Hebrew
From: Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4. Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5. Re: Tones in the IPA [Re: USAGE: Help with Chinese phrase]
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6. Re: Tones in the IPA [Re: USAGE: Help with Chinese phrase]
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7. Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8. Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9. Relay 8 is online!
From: Jan van Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10. Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11. Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
From: Steven Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12. 'Lectocentric Orthography Comprehension contest (was Re: The fourteen vowels
of English?)
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13. Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14. Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15. Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
From: Steven Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16. Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17. Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18. Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19. Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20. Flag: Volunteer needed
From: "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21. Article wierdness
From: "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22. Re: Flag: Volunteer needed
From: Robert B Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23. Re: Flag: Volunteer needed
From: Leland Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24. Re: Flag: Volunteer needed
From: "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25. Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
From: Christian Thalmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 14:58:27 +0200
From: Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization etc)
On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 19:53:17 +0100, Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One German visitor who stayed with
> us several years ago told me that |�|, |�| and |�| should be written as
> |AE|, |OE| and |UE| when writing in block capitals. I don't know whether
> this is universally true or just a habit of hers.
Habit of her's, I'd say. I'd certainly expect to see |� � �| in
general use; |AE OE UE| are understandable and occur in certain
contexts even in modern use, but I'd consider those spellings
stylistically marked.
Cheers,
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mind the Reply-To!
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:10:24 +0200
From: Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Grammar of Hebrew
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:14:04 +0930, Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating
Dragon) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm assuming that "shel" (of) is closely related to "sheli" (of me).
Looks like Arabic, where you can also add possessive suffixes to
prepositions to create a compound word, e.g. "li" = to me, from l-
"to" + -i "my", or "fi" = in me, from fi "in" + -i "my".
Cheers,
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Watch the Reply-To!
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:30:51 +0100
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
On Thursday, September 9, 2004, at 07:38 , Isaac A. Penzev wrote:
> Tam�s Racsk� jazdy:
>
>> The real Slav usage is Cyrillic, indeed. Before WWII, nearly
>> almost nations under the Soviet domination were forced to use
>> Cyrillic orthography instead of their previous Latin traditions;
>> even Rumanians living in Soviet Moldova.
>
> Just a side note: Romanian was written with Cyrillic letters till 1859.
Yep - the earliest Rumanian text date from the 16th cent IIRC. The
language was written solely in Cyrillic until the second half of the 19th
century (the date I have is 1860 - but what's in one year?). The change to
Roman script was the result of a Latinist movement, dating from the late
18th century, which sought to deepen relation with the Romancelang
countries.
> Latin orthography was introduced after independent Romanian state came to
> existence, as a symbol of Westernization and being a "Romance" country.
Well, the language is unquestionably a Romance language, and the Romanians
still, in fact, call themselves 'Romans'.
> So
> in 1930s Moldovan Romanians simply returned to their native orthography
> (that I personally find very aesthetic).
I understood that when the Moldavian principality became a Soviet Republic,
it was a modified form of Russian Cyrillic that was introduced, not a
revival of the earlier Romanian Cyrillic which had been based on the Old
Bulgarian Cyrillic.
Since 1989, Moldavian has adopted the Roman alphabet.
>> Turks has a long connection with Venice.
> [skip]
>> Therefore Turkish system is a balkanized amalgam of various
>> Romance conventions plus German for un-Romance front round vowels.
>
> Hehe. One more side note: the Turkish alphabet is an adaptation (sic!) of
> Azeri "New Alphabet" ("Yenalif"), that was designed in 1920s by Soviet
> linguists. The lgs are pretty close, you know, so it was not a problem to
> borrow the whole alphabet, throwing away three letters denoting specific
> Azeri sounds!
Yes, I know Azeri & Turkish are closely related, but I really don't see
much resemblance between Turkish Romanization and the Azeri Roman alphabet
of 1922 to 1933, except the Azeri use of |c| and |�| which corresponds to
the Turkish use (I notice that rom 1933 until the introduction of Cyrillic
in 1940, the values of the two letters were reversed in Azeri). So indeed
we can safely point to Azeri Romanization for the Turkish use of those two
letters. But the rounded front vowels were not denoted by o-umlaut &
u-umlaut in Azeri and |�| (s with comma or cedilla) was not, according to
my sources, introduced to Azeri until the 1933 reform which was _after_
the adoption of the Roman alphabet by the Turks. The letter was already in
use in Romanian and this must surely have been the source its adoption in
Turkish.
I basically agree with Tam�s that the Turkish alphabet was eclectic in its
sources; but I do concede that 1920s Azeri Roman alphabets should be added
to the sources - plus also the odd bit of inventiveness by the Turks
themselves like the use of dotted and undotted i (not a good idea IMO).
Since obtaining independence, the modern Republic of Azerbaijan has
abandoned Cyrillic and reverted to the Roman alphabet.
>
> -- Yitzik
> (from ex-USSR,
...in which the policy regarding orthographic reform changed. In the 1920s
Romanization was the norm. IIRC Lenin is recorded as saying to comrade
Agamaly-Ogly, president of the Central Pan-Soviet Committee of National
Alphabets: "Romanization, there lies the great revolution of the east."
Wasn't there some talk even of Romanizing Russian?
But, of course, things changed under Stalin and all these new
Romanizations were swept away in 1939-1940 and Cyrillic replaced all
earlier alphabets with the exception of Gerorgian & Armenian.
But I believe the pre-1939 Romanized alphabets have been re-established
everywhere now.
But to return to the odd use of |c| = [dZ] (the use of |�| = [tS] is not
particularly strange). It is all ver well saying that Turkish got this
from the Azeri Romanization. But what was origin of it in Azeri? Was there
someone on the Pan-Soviet Committee of National Alphabets familiar with
the Volap�k use, I wonder.
And why did Schleyer actually come up with the unusual |c| = [dZ] and
|j| = [S]? I guess just a bit of inventiveness on his part.
Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===============================================
"They are evidently confusing science with technology."
UMBERTO ECO September, 2004
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:42:10 -0400
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
Ray Brown scripsit:
> But the rounded front vowels were not denoted by o-umlaut &
> u-umlaut in Azeri and |?| (s with comma or cedilla) was not, according to
> my sources, introduced to Azeri until the 1933 reform which was _after_
> the adoption of the Roman alphabet by the Turks. The letter was already in
> use in Romanian and this must surely have been the source its adoption in
> Turkish.
If it were so, the Turks would surely have adopted it in the form
of s-comma-below rather than s-cedilla. So while the Romanian usage
probably accounts for the pronunciation of Turkish s-cedilla, it seems
to me unlikely to be the immediate source of its form.
> But, of course, things changed under Stalin and all these new
> Romanizations were swept away in 1939-1940 and Cyrillic replaced all
> earlier alphabets with the exception of Gerorgian & Armenian.
Yiddish continued to be written in the Hebrew alphabet, although the
spelling of Hebrew borrowings was reformed to make them phonetic
rather than (as was done elsewhere) written as in Hebrew.
Korean also continued to be written in hangeul. Dungan, however, though
it is part of the Mandarin dialect continuum, did get a Cyrillic orthography;
its three tones are not represented.
In addition, of course, Western European languages spoken by minorities
in the Soviet Union (German, Polish, Czech, etc.) continued to be written
in their Latin-alphabet forms.
> But I believe the pre-1939 Romanized alphabets have been re-established
> everywhere now.
Sometimes with changes, as in Turkmenistan.
--
We call nothing profound [EMAIL PROTECTED]
that is not wittily expressed. John Cowan
--Northrop Frye (improved) http://www.reutershealth.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:36:32 -0400
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Tones in the IPA [Re: USAGE: Help with Chinese phrase]
Mark Reed �rta: "...where are the tone symbols placed in IPA?"
Above the vowel, I believe. I'm not sure about diphthongs or the like tho.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:56:48 -0400
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Tones in the IPA [Re: USAGE: Help with Chinese phrase]
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:36:32 -0400, Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark Reed �rta: "...where are the tone symbols placed in IPA?"
> Above the vowel, I believe. I'm not sure about diphthongs or the like
> tho.
The tone diacritics are, and I think they go above the main component of
the diphthong -- i.e. over the /a/ in both /aj/ and /ja/.
However, the independent tone symbols (those which can be arbitrarily
concatenated, and which are full h-height glyphs in their own right) are a
different story. I *think* they come either after the vowel, or at the end
of the syllable. It's times like this that I wish I had a copy of Pullum
to hand...
Paul
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:53:23 -0400
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:42:10 -0400, John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ray Brown scripsit:
>
>> But the rounded front vowels were not denoted by o-umlaut &
>> u-umlaut in Azeri and |?| (s with comma or cedilla) was not, according
>> to
>> my sources, introduced to Azeri until the 1933 reform which was _after_
>> the adoption of the Roman alphabet by the Turks. The letter was already
>> in
>> use in Romanian and this must surely have been the source its adoption
>> in
>> Turkish.
>
> If it were so, the Turks would surely have adopted it in the form
> of s-comma-below rather than s-cedilla. So while the Romanian usage
> probably accounts for the pronunciation of Turkish s-cedilla, it seems
> to me unlikely to be the immediate source of its form.
OTOH, it's easy to me to see {s-comma} as {s-squiggle}, and given the
existing squiggle in {c-cedilla}, the use of {cedilla} for the squiggle
under the |s| would seem to me a logical jump to make. Most print in
newspapers and books is small enough to make the difference trivial (and
indeed, ISO deemed it trivial enough to not distinguish {s-cedilla} from
{s-comma} until recently).
Then again, I'm no master typographer, nor turkologist, but it's easy for
me to see where it could have been a direct influence.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:56:50 -0400
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
Even if it's YAEPT, this thread is interesting--
Paul Bennett �rta: "I remember reading somewhere that English has 14 vowels
(presumably including diphthongs), but that every dialect collapses at least
two of them together. Well, I decided to measure my own lect, and got some
surprising results. I have at least 17 vowels that I can think of, all of
which can appear between /h/ and /d/...
[snip]
Wow, your dialect seems extremely British-y. I didn't think U.S.-ians ever
talked that way*! Are you a British immigrant or something?
Well, here's my 'lect's vocalic inventory (including diphthongs):
heed /i/
*heared /ir\/ [Is there such a word at all??]
hid /I/
head /E/
haired /Er\/ [Is that even a word??]
had /&/
heard, herd /r\=/
hawed /A/
hard /Ar\/
HUD /V/ [Would anyone be so kind as to look through their dictionary to see
if there are any words [hVd]?]
hoard /@U)r\/
hoed /@U)/
hood /U/
who'd /u/
hide /AI)/
heyed /EI)/
hoyed /OI)/
how'd /&U)/
Wow, I've got eighteen vowels!
A quick question: I've seen /EI)/, e.g., as well as /Ej)/. Is there a
difference?
"...I'm still kinda half working on that onset/peak/coda writing system for
English..."
Cool! I'd be interested in taking a look at it if you ever finish it.
BTW, it'd be interesting if everyone designed a 'lectocentric orthography,
as it were, and wrote a short text in it, to see if everyone could
understand it. Sort of an English-'lect relay! Hmm, maybe I'll work on
that... Stay tuned for news, folks. :))
Trebor
"Oysters are a fine thing, so are strawberries: but mashed together?"
*) I'm guessing you're from or inhabit the U.s., judging by your e-mail
address, altho Ph. D.'s ends in .cc and he lives in Michigan IIRC (are you
an immigrant from the Cocos/Keelings Ilands? Altho, I live in Canada but I'm
using a Free account, which is French. Oh, and a quick question: Why are
some URLs in English even tho their country extension represents a
non-Anglophone country? E.g. www.freemail.hu, Tam�s' e-mail provider).
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 22:00:54 +0100
From: Jan van Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Relay 8 is online!
All,
After quite a while, Conlang Translation Relay #8 is online! Since,
unfortunately, the special relay domains Christophe reserved for us
at .free.fr are not operational anymore, I've decided to upload
everything Peter sent me to my own webspace instead.
Come and see: <http://steen.free.fr/relay8/relay.html>
Jan
=====
"If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping in a closed room
with a mosquito."
Relay 10/R - schedule: <http://steen.free.fr/relay10/schedule.html>
- rules: <http://steen.free.fr/relay10/intro.html>
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger -
all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:04:39 -0400
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
Paul Bennett �rta: "OTOH, it's easy to me to see {s-comma} as {s-squiggle},
and given the existing squiggle in {c-cedilla}, the use of {cedilla} for the
squiggle under the |s| would seem to me a logical jump to make. Most print
in newspapers and books is small enough to make the difference trivial (and
indeed, ISO deemed it trivial enough to not distinguish {s-cedilla} from
{s-comma} until recently)."
I was under the impression that the terms "cedilla" and "comma" are
synonymous, just that "cedilla" means the diacritical mark used in French,
Turkish, Polish, etc., and "comma" means the symbol when used as a
punctuation mark.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 23:42:11 +0200
From: Steven Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
--- Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> *heared /ir\/ [Is there such a word at all??]
Nope, though in some people's speech (usually
uneducated), it is a plausible word; at least, I've
heard it before around here.
> haired /Er\/ [Is that even a word??]
'Red-haired.'
> had /&/
I have a funny little split I noticed in my dialect
(standard American, mild Southern influence). In
certain words, I pronounce [&] something like [&@],
and in others, it's straight [&]. Examples:
/man/ [m&@n] (or [mn=] in compounds where it's
unstressed)
/calque/ [k&lk]
/sat/ [s&t]
/happy/ [h&.pi]
/fare/ [f&r\] or [fEr\]
/nab/ [n&@b]
/nap/ [n&p]
/hang/ [h&N] or [hEN]
/nag/ [n&@g]
/had/ [h&@d]
/has/ [h&z]
/ham/ [h&@m]
I can't think of any minimal pairs, so this seems to
be a complementary distribution, where [&@] is an
allophone of [&] before nasals [m] and [n] and voiced
plosives and [&] is the phonetic realization every
where else. Depending on the stress of the word and
personal whim, [&] before [N] and [r\] seems to be,
allophonically, either [E] or [&]. I tend to lean
towards [&] more in higher registers of speech, where
I make an effort to be understood clearly, and [E] in
fast speech, since it's easier to articulate quickly.
Anyone else have this speech characteristic? It's very
common around where I live (central Florida) and seems
to be just a general American phonetic phenomenon.
> HUD /V/ [Would anyone be so kind as to look through
> their dictionary to see
> if there are any words [hVd]?]
In America, there's a government organization called
'HUD' (Housing and Urban Development, I think), and
it's usually pronounced that way. At least, I
pronounce the acronym that way.
> hoard /@U)r\/
> hoed /@U)/
General American seems to be [OU] or something
similar. Just out of curiosity, which dialect are you
speaking?
> how'd /&U)/
That's a characteristic of Southern speech; [ai] comes
out as [&I] in some people's speech, but it's almost
invariably [&U] with [au]. Also, Southerners tend to
lean more towards pronouncing [&] as [&@] than those
who speak standard American.
> A quick question: I've seen /EI)/, e.g., as well as
> /Ej)/. Is there a
> difference?
Not really. [EI] if you want to be really exact about
the onset and end of a diphthong, [Ej] if you don't
feel like or can't tell the difference between the
elements [i] and [I] in a diphthong. I think [j] is
closer to [I] than [i], at least as I pronounce it.
=====
"Alle Idole m�ssen sterben."
"All idols must die."
--Einst�rzende Neubauten, "Seele Brennt" (Soul is on Fire)
"Where am I? What is this thing called 'the world'? Who is it who has lured me into
the thing, and now leaves me here? How did I come into the world? Why was I not
consulted?"
--S�ren Kierkegaard
"You need not leave your room. Remain sitting at your table and listen. You need not
even listen, simply wait, just learn to become quiet, and still, and solitary. The
world will freely offer itself to you to be unmasked. It has no choice; it will roll
in ecstasy at your feet."
--Franz Kafka, Journals
___________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 100MB Speicher kostenlos - Hier anmelden:
http://mail.yahoo.de
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:42:19 -0400
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: 'Lectocentric Orthography Comprehension contest (was Re: The fourteen vowels
of English?)
If anyone is interested, please e-mail me offlist and I'll send you the
pertenant information. If more than one person shows interest, I'll write up
a relay schedule and CC it to all participants in the ''Lectocentric
Orthography Comprehension contest. I'll post the results after the relay.
Trebor
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:29:15 -0400
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
Steven Williams �rta: "'Red-haired.'
D'oh! =P
"I have a funny little split I noticed in my dialect (standard American,
mild Southern influence). In certain words, I pronounce [&] something like
[&@], and in others, it's straight [&]. [...] I can't think of any minimal
pairs, so this seems to be a complementary distribution, where [&@] is an
allophone of [&] before nasals [m] and [n] and voiced plosives and [&] is
the phonetic realization every where else. Depending on the stress of the
word and personal whim, [&] before [N] and [r\] seems to be, allophonically,
either [E] or [&]. I tend to lean towards [&] more in higher registers of
speech, where I make an effort to be understood clearly, and [E] in fast
speech, since it's easier to articulate quickly. Anyone else have this
speech characteristic? It's very common around where I live (central
Florida) and seems to be just a general American phonetic phenomenon.
I think you're right: My grandmother at least (who's lived in the Midwest
all her life AFAIK [I haven't noticed [&]~[&@] in my other relatives'
speech; I'll pay attention next time I visit them]) has [&@]. I lack this
particular allophonic distinction.
What puzzles me tho is [EN] rather than /&N/ (henceforth, /&N/ refers to the
possibility of both [&N] and [&@N] occurring) in your speech ([Er\] doesn't
surprise me. In words like "carry", which I would transcribe phonemically as
/k&r\i/, my 'lect lowers the [&] to [E]). I haven't noticed [EN]</&N/ in my
grandmother's speech (altho I only see her for one-two weeks a year, as my
family lives so far away, so I don't have much time to listen to her speech.
I'm not so sure about my grandfather's speech; IIRC he lacks [&@]).
I also recall my grandmother's [&@]'s being a bit nasalized. Do you notice
this phenomenon in your speech?
"General American seems to be [OU] or something similar.
Hmm, well, that's always possible--I'm not a linguist, so I guess since my
ears aren't trained I can't really hear the difference so much (if I
pronounce those diphthongs carefully I can distinguish them ATM, but I guess
[OU)] gets neutralized to [EMAIL PROTECTED])] in fast speech in my 'lect, or
something).
"Just out of curiosity, which dialect are you
speaking?
Southern Ontario English (a dialect which in monosyllabic words neutralizes
the main part of a diphthong, e.g. "ride" [r\AI)d] ~ "write/right" [EMAIL PROTECTED])t]
(or maybe [r\VI)t]? I can't tell for sure)--does anyone else notice this in
their speech?).
Trebor
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:35:44 -0600
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:04:39 -0400, Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was under the impression that the terms "cedilla" and "comma" are
> synonymous, just that "cedilla" means the diacritical mark used in French,
> Turkish, Polish, etc., and "comma" means the symbol when used as a
> punctuation mark.
The cedilla is comma-shaped. The choice of the term "cedilla" versus "comma" appears
to refer to whether the diacritic's preferred position is attached to the letter by a
short stroke (cedilla) or not attached (comma).
*Muke!
--
website: http://frath.net/
LiveJournal: http://kohath.livejournal.com/
deviantArt: http://kohath.deviantart.com/
FrathWiki, a conlang and conculture wiki:
http://wiki.frath.net/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 00:43:00 +0200
From: Steven Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
--- Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> What puzzles me tho is [EN] rather than /&N/
> (henceforth, /&N/ refers to the
> possibility of both [&N] and [&@N] occurring)
[&@N] never occurs in my speech, and I've never heard
it before. If it is pronounced thus, it's probably
someone being facetious.
> I also recall my grandmother's [&@]'s being a bit
> nasalized. Do you notice
> this phenomenon in your speech?
If nasalization exists, it's very slight. The Southern
accents are notorious for their rampant nasalization,
though.
> "General American seems to be [OU] or something
> similar.
>
> Hmm, well, that's always possible--I'm not a
> linguist, so I guess since my
> ears aren't trained I can't really hear the
> difference so much (if I
> pronounce those diphthongs carefully I can
> distinguish them ATM, but I guess
> [OU)] gets neutralized to [EMAIL PROTECTED])] in fast speech in my
> 'lect, or something).
I'd have to hear it to be sure. You said you're
Canadian, right? I seem to remember [EMAIL PROTECTED])] existing as
a diphthong in Canadianese, but I seem to associate it
with the diphthong [aU]; i.e., /house/ [EMAIL PROTECTED], /mouse/
[EMAIL PROTECTED], and so on.
> Southern Ontario English (a dialect which in
> monosyllabic words neutralizes
> the main part of a diphthong, e.g. "ride" [r\AI)d] ~
> "write/right" [EMAIL PROTECTED])t]
> (or maybe [r\VI)t]? I can't tell for sure)--does
> anyone else notice this in
> their speech?).
Weird. I don't recall ever hearing anything like it.
At least, no one around here speaks like that. Then
again, Canadians would spontaneously combust in
Florida :).
___________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 100MB Speicher kostenlos - Hier anmelden:
http://mail.yahoo.de
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:07:31 -0400
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
Be aware my IPA transcription is untutored, and may be iffy. However, I
need to study the vowels of English if I'm ever to get this script
underway. It's definitely going to be onset/peak/coda and not
onset/peak+coda, as I originally planned. One glyph for each phoneme of
English, as dialect-agnostic as possible.
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 16:56:50 -0400, Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wow, your dialect seems extremely British-y. I didn't think U.S.-ians
> ever
> talked that way*! Are you a British immigrant or something?
Yes. For slightly over four years now, I've been living in North Carolina,
but I originate from the Milton Keynes transdialectical region in the UK,
of North London (specifically Harrow) stock.
/jes fO slAjtli @Uv@ fO [EMAIL PROTECTED] nAu Ajv bIn lIvIN In nOT [EMAIL PROTECTED]@
bVt Aj
@r\IdZInEjt fr\Qm D@ mIlt7n ki:nz [EMAIL PROTECTED]@l [EMAIL PROTECTED] In D@ ju kEj
Qv nOT lVndVn spEsIfikli [EMAIL PROTECTED] stQk/
I adapted to using USian English online some time before the thoughts of
even coming to the USA entered my mind, simply because it seemed the best
way to address my target audience.
/Aj 7daptId t@ juziN ju es [EMAIL PROTECTED] InglIS QnlAjn sVm tAjm [EMAIL PROTECTED]
D@ TO:ts @v
[EMAIL PROTECTED] kVmIN tu D@ ju es Ej [EMAIL PROTECTED] mAj mAjnd sImpli [EMAIL
PROTECTED] It si:md D@ best
wEj tu @dres mAj tAgIt O:dijens/
Paul
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:33:48 -0400
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 11:42:11PM +0200, Steven Williams wrote:
> I have a funny little split I noticed in my dialect
> (standard American, mild Southern influence). In
> certain words, I pronounce [&] something like [&@],
> and in others, it's straight [&]. Examples:
>
> /man/ [m&@n] (or [mn=] in compounds where it's
This is where we differ. My /&/ is just [&] before /n/; it's only [&@] (or
something like it) before voiced *velars*, nasal or not (i.e. /g/ and
/N/, but not /k/ or /m/ or /n/). If you listen to the B-52s song "Love
Shack", the "bang" in "Bang! Bang! On the door baby!" has the same
diphthong I hear in my speech.
-Marcos
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:29:58 -0400
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:07:31 -0400, Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> One glyph for each phoneme of
> English, as dialect-agnostic as possible.
Gah. What an idiot. Not symbol:phoneme::1:1. Not that at all. Quite far
from that. I'm thinking about making it somewhat featural, though. I hope
that what I meant is obvious from the rest of what I've said.
Paul
/slaps self for stupidity in public
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:33:57 -0400
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
Muke Tever scripsit:
> The cedilla is comma-shaped.
There are cedillas that are comma shaped and attached, but that is
not the preferred shape in French typography, and it's downright
taboo in Portuguese. The normative cedilla has a vertical descender
followed by a rounded shape with the upper left quadrant missing.
--
John Cowan www.ccil.org/~cowan www.reutershealth.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mr. Henry James writes fiction as if it were a painful duty. --Oscar Wilde
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 13:09:02 +0930
From: "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Flag: Volunteer needed
By about eighteen hours ago I had finished creating a workable web
form with which people could vote for their favourite flags. I
uploaded this, only to discover (shock!) that my ISP's server does not
in fact support PHP (I had simply assumed that it would). I plan to
speak to my ISP sometime and request that this state of affairs be
changed, but I can't do that on a weekend.
The bottom line is that I can't host the form. I therefore need a
volunteer who can, and is willing to do so. Note that I wrote the form
using PHP version 4.3.3 and some changes would be necessary to make it
work with earlier versions. It would be really nice to avoid that, so
I'd prefer someone with a recent version.
Apart from uploading a few files, testing the form once or twice, and
telling the list where to find it, no work is required on your part. I
can still do the job of feeding the results into the Condorcet
calculator and uploading a summary of the results. Note, however, that
the form will timestamp the submitted votes using your timezone (the
timezone your server is in), which may affect how voting should be
declared open and closed.
I consider it vital to give the form a practice run, in order to iron
out any bugs and also to get feedback on the presentation. Once
someone has uploaded it for me, and has told the list where to find
it, I would be grateful if people would submit practice votes and
comment on the output of the form. If you submit an invalid vote
(e.g. specify the same flag as both your first and second preferences,
or specify a flag that doesn't exist), the form will tell you why it
is invalid. If you submit a valid vote, the form will let you check
that it is what you intended before you submit it. I want feedback on
how well the form does these things.
In response to feedback I'll send the volunteer an updated version of
the form (and make sure they know how to reset the list of submitted
votes). After that, we'll take it from there.
Adrian.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 12:08:34 +0930
From: "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Article wierdness
"It isn't a bowl of lion's eye soup unless it contains the eye of a lion."
This morning it struck me that it's a wierd peculiarity of English to
use the definite article before 'eye' in that context. Lions, after
all, have two eyes, so logic dictates that the article should be
indefinite. However, when a part of a whole is an ingredient in a
recipe, it seems that we use the definite article to refer to the part
(this doesn't apply to measurements - it's "the eye of a lion", but
it's "a cup of water").
Is there a deeper layer of logic here? Has this phenomenon been
studied?
Adrian.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 01:36:07 -0400
From: Robert B Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Flag: Volunteer needed
On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 13:09:02 +0930 "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating
Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The bottom line is that I can't host the form. I therefore need a
> volunteer who can, and is willing to do so. Note that I wrote the
> form
> using PHP version 4.3.3 and some changes would be necessary to make
> it
> work with earlier versions. It would be really nice to avoid that,
> so
> I'd prefer someone with a recent version.
100webspace.com offers free hosting with php 4.3.4... i've been using it
to host some perl scripts, since i can't use perl on free.fr...
--
robert wilson (aka hotaru)
http://www.xanga.com/hotaru_01
http://www.nchan.tk/
http://www.kuvazokad.tk/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 23
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 23:09:46 -0700
From: Leland Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Flag: Volunteer needed
If 100webspace doesn't work out for you, I'm also willing to throw
this up on kusmer.com... Let me know.
-Lee
On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 01:36:07 -0400, Robert B Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 13:09:02 +0930 "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating
> Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The bottom line is that I can't host the form. I therefore need a
> > volunteer who can, and is willing to do so. Note that I wrote the
> > form
> > using PHP version 4.3.3 and some changes would be necessary to make
> > it
> > work with earlier versions. It would be really nice to avoid that,
> > so
> > I'd prefer someone with a recent version.
>
> 100webspace.com offers free hosting with php 4.3.4... i've been using it
> to host some perl scripts, since i can't use perl on free.fr...
>
> --
> robert wilson (aka hotaru)
> http://www.xanga.com/hotaru_01
> http://www.nchan.tk/
> http://www.kuvazokad.tk/
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 17:04:47 +0930
From: "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Flag: Volunteer needed
Robert B Wilson wrote:
> 100webspace.com offers free hosting with php 4.3.4... i've been using it
> to host some perl scripts, since i can't use perl on free.fr...
Having created the account and uploaded the relevant files, I can't
figure out where the hell they are!
If the FTP host is username.freeserverhost.net and the Access Path is
/www/ then surely the URL should be
http://username.freeserverhost.net/www/nameofpage.php
Where should I be looking?
Adrian.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 10:03:02 -0000
From: Christian Thalmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The fourteen vowels of English?
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is where we differ. My /&/ is just [&] before /n/; it's only
[&@] (or
> something like it) before voiced *velars*, nasal or not (i.e. /g/ and
> /N/, but not /k/ or /m/ or /n/).
Hmmm... so you don't say "dayum" for "damn"? ;-)
-- Christian Thalmann
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
