------------------------ 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: (2) new conlang- B�huenagwon
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: Re: new conlang- B�huenagwon
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. Re: Conlang Flag: Voting
From: Arthaey Angosii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4. Re: Hebrew spelling
From: David H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5. Subject / Object / ?
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6. Re: Conlang Flag: Voting
From: "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7. Re: Hebrew spelling
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8. Re: Getting a job in the Linguistics sector ... ?
From: Carsten Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9. Re: The Power of Language
From: Carsten Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10. Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
From: Racsko Tamas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11. Re: Hebrew spelling
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12. Re: Hebrew spelling
From: David H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13. [4:] ~ [r]
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14. TECH: How to go nomail
From: Afian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15. Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16. Re: Hebrew spelling
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17. TECH: How to go nomail
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18. Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19. Re: Those darn curly subscripts (was: More orthographic miscellanea)
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20. Re: [4:] ~ [r]
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21. LaTeX for Conlangers -- Question posted
From: Carsten Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22. Re: Hebrew spelling
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23. Re: Those darn curly subscripts (was: More orthographic miscellanea)
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24. Re: Spanish ll in different dialects
From: Marcos Benitez Valle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25. Re: Conlang Flag: Voting
From: Arthaey Angosii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 02:48:49 +0200
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: (2) new conlang- B�huenagwon
>you've got your verb, however, there are further suffixes that attach only
to the verb "to bake x", and which further specify how the baking is accomplished.
That's pretty interesting. It also means that suffixes can be recycled--in other
words, the suffix /-'ea/ (oh: what's the apostrophe for?) can be used with
every single verb, and could mean something different each time. Or perhaps
it could have a locus of meanings, all interrelated. If you were going for
naturalness,
I'd recommend doing it that way. The way it looks now, it almost looks like you're
creating a kind of...engelang? Is that the right word? Anyway, everything looks
very regular--phonologically. There's no real need for that.
well, if I make 'ea into simply "sun" (since it's already following "[to]
bake"...then what happens when "sun" follows "cold" ?
*curious*
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 02:42:53 +0200
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Re: new conlang- B�huenagwon
>Finally, this statement you made...
><<Word order is Subject-Verb-Etc.>>
>...is clearly not true. The linear order you have is this: (1) clay; (2) sunbake;
>(3) shape; (4) and. There is no subject, but there is no place in this sentence that
>you can stick a subject that would cause it to occur directly before the verb.
>(Well, unless it was a suffix to the direct object, giving you OSV order.) It looks
>to me like the word order will be SOV (subject-object-verb),
on thinking it over, I suspect that "clay" would be the subject...yes?
> unless you don't think of the object as an actual argument, but
a suffix, in which case you could make an argument for SV word order--if that's where
the subject goes. But there is no subject in this sentence. Can you give us a
sentence with a subject? But don't start off with something complex like "to sunbake
and shape clay". Start with something simple. How about:
>The man sees the dog.
so far, the entire vocabulary pertains to geology; now I have to add biology, eh? :)
>Anyway, man, you've got some really wild ideas. How did you think this stuff up?
"let's give it to Mikey, he'll eat anything."
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 03:00:51 -0700
From: Arthaey Angosii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Conlang Flag: Voting
Emaelivpeith Adrian Morgan:
> Arthaey Angosii wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure if I sounded argumentative in my original post,
>
> A little bit (pedantic is a better word) especially when you were
> commenting on such trivial things as the fact that errors are reported
> in reverse order.
>
> For my part, I was replying after midnight. It's possible that if I
> had been less tired, there would have been sentences that I'd have
> noticed a better way of phrasing.
Yes, most of the things I commented on were trivial. The page had
imperfections, so I reported on them, in the interest of improving the
page. I'm sorry that it sounded like I was making them into larger
issues than either of us believe them to be.
So I'm just going to go ahead and blame that on the level of bugs I'm
encouraged to report at work, and that I was awake about 3 hours
earlier than usual when I wrote the e-mail.
No hard feelings, then? :)
> On the voting form, the images are there for only one reason - to show
> the voter which code corresponds to which image. Everyone who votes
> will have already viewed the images and descriptions on the
> conlangflags.htm page. So it's OK to have re-sized images (basically
> thumbnails) on the voting form, even if some information is lost,
> because the full images are on display elsewhere anyway. So I'll use
> re-sized images.
Sound reasoning.
> However, I would like the voter to be able to view the full-sized
> images as conveniently as possible. What is the HTML code to make the
> target of a link (in this case an image) appear in a new window?
I don't know the HTML for that off the top of my head, but I'm sure if
you google for something like "HTML target new window" will turn up
what you need.
--
AA
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 06:09:48 -0400
From: David H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hebrew spelling
Well, the word "me'od" is most often spelled "mem alef vav dalet" ...at
least that's how I've seen it, but it already has an alef carrying the o
sound, so a vav shouldn't be needed, so why do people write it like this?
Thanks
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:39:16 +0200
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Subject / Object / ?
what is the difference between Subjects, Objects, and something that might be
confused with them?
thanks.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:45:07 +0930
From: "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Conlang Flag: Voting
I've made some changes. The updated version can now be viewed and tried.
http://gzarondar.freeserverhost.net/flagvote.php
Adrian.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:40:45 +0300
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hebrew spelling
On Sep 12, 2004, at 1:09 PM, David H wrote:
> Well, the word "me'od" is most often spelled "mem alef vav dalet" ...at
> least that's how I've seen it, but it already has an alef carrying the
> o
> sound, so a vav shouldn't be needed, so why do people write it like
> this?
> Thanks
Because the alef isn't carrying the /o/!
The alef in _me'od_ is *consonantal*, not an _eim qeri'a_. Hence the
glottal stop /?/, transcribed |'| in the middle.
If it were a vowel-holder, the word would be _mod_.
If i remember correctly, there is a word _nod_ spelled with an alef in
the middle.
-Stephen (Steg)
"se�bh�a` t�bh"?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:37:17 +0200
From: Carsten Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Getting a job in the Linguistics sector ... ?
Hey all!
On Saturday 11 September 2004 22:25, Philip Newton wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 14:29:10 +0200, Carsten Becker
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > WARNING! THIS MAY VIOLATE THE "NO CROSS/NO CROWN"
> > RULE!!
>
> The what?
It's kind of an unwritten law here, as it seems. Because
discussions about politics, religion and the like usually
tend to break lose endless off-topic discussions and clog
up the list (see the ZBB at some stages), someone put up
this rule to avoid discussions about these topics.
To get back to the topic, I'll ask at Wycliffe and SIL what
*they* demand as #vocational training. Someone suggested
offlist that I might need to go to the UK or the US if SIL
closed its ?representation in Germany.
Carsten
--
Eri silvev�ng aibannama padangin.
Nivaie evaenain eri ming silvoiev�ng caparei.
- Antoine de Saint-Exup�ry, Le Petit Prince
-> http://www.beckerscarsten.de/?conlang=ayeri
# indicates a lookup from the dictionary.
? indicates a word that I'm not sure about.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:39:28 +0200
From: Carsten Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Power of Language
Hey!
On Saturday 11 September 2004 22:02, Adam
Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious wrote:
> (1) Al-Dajjal is described by Muslims as the arabic word
> for "the Antichrist." As a Christian, I heavily study
> the apocalyptic Bible and reread those portions often to
> see if it can accurately describe current events (by the
> way, the UN is taking some actions that some Christians
> have expected to happen in the end times - it wasn't
> until they actually began these actions that I myself
> believed that the UN actually has the possibility of
> being the Beast of the Sea). My dad, a Muslim, has
> taught me of al-Dajjal, al-Mahdi, and Isu in the endtimes
> (the "Antichrist," the defeator of the "Antichrist," and
> Jesus) and I eventually came to the theological
> conclusion that al-Dajjal will exist, but will not be the
> Antichrist. I suspect that al-Dajjal will probably be
> from the UN or the Pope (although I feel that the Pope is
> going to gain more power in the UN than what he has now)
> will be al-Dajjal because... well, you have to read the
> appendixes when I publish the book ;)
Have you read the "Left Behind" series by LaHaye and
Jenkins? I've heard they'd be quite popular in the US?
These novel series deal with what happens after all
Christians are removed from the earth. Not with the removed ones, but
with the people that are 'left behind'.
The books are build upon what is written in the Book of Revelation, only
transferred to what might possibly happen in our time.
Carsten
--
Eri silvev�ng aibannama padangin.
Nivaie evaenain eri ming silvoiev�ng caparei.
- Antoine de Saint-Exup�ry, Le Petit Prince
-> http://www.beckerscarsten.de/?conlang=ayeri
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:09:12 +0100
From: Racsko Tamas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
On 11 Sep 2004 "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But anyway I meant there was nothing strange to write in Moldavian with
> Cyrillics.
In this context you are right: the orthography corresponds to the
religion. Not even the choice between the Latin, Cyrillic, Arab
scripts, but even within one script: Hungarian had different Catholic
and Reformed orthography until 19th century.
> Btw, AFAIK, Cyrillics are still in use in Transnistria (a rebel region
> on the left bank of Dniester).
But there was an ethnic segregation after 1990, I am right? AFAIK the
Russian is the "official" language there. Are Rumanian (Moldavan) used
in present Transnistria?
And do you know what is the situation with the third autonomous
region, Gagauzia? Are they still use their Cyrillic script?
> > Therefore there was no Rumanian "orthography" until 1859, at all.
> My sources give a different info: "Since establishment of indepenent
> Moldovan state in 1359 and till nowadays (with short breaks) Moldovans
> have been using Cyrillic alphabet. The first Moldovan printing shop was
> found in Yassy in 1640.
[...]
> I think the question is strongly influenced by political issues, so let
> us stop.
I do not want to blame anybody here. Let's see Hungarian history.
The very first Hungarian text dates from 1192-1195 ("Halotti Besz�d �s
K�ny�rg�s", Sermo super sepulchrum, Funeral sermon and prayer), the
first initiatives of the literary standard were in the middle of 16th
century, but it gained a wider ground only in the end of 18th century.
And the present orthography was elaborated decades later.
It was a long process (350-600 years) from the very first text
monument to get to a literary language in Hungary despite of the fact
that this country was an autonomous regional power between 10th--mid-
16th century. In fact, there were numerous Hungarian publications
before a literary standard would be fixed. But that time, the editors
used their dialects written by their particular orthography. (Some
Hungarian typographers used completely Husitic -- i.e. Czech-like --
letters before, others invented special characters like one resembling
a small-cap "L" for /tS/ etc.)
The very first Hungarian printing shop was founded in 1473. It lasted
300 years yet to reach a widely accepted common Hungarian standard. The
first Rumanian text dates from 1521, the first printing shop was
founded in 1640, they lived under Turkish, Polish, Hungarian domination
in three separate countries (Transsylvania, Moldavia, Wallachia). Thus
they started handicapped, lagging behind with centuries, and your
source states that they reached a literary standard earlier than
Hungarians. It is hardly believable.
In fact, Rumanian literary language is an amalgam of Muntenian
(=Bucharest area, the heart of Wallachia) and southern Transsylvanian
dialects. The Moldovan contribution is very little.
Until this point, politics are not involved. Therefore I stop here,
because later consideriationas on Moldovan Rumanian are connected with
the questions of two separate Mordvin, two separate Zyrian and six(!)
separate Ostyak etc. literary norms. And this is politics, indeed.
> I just said I find Moldovan Cyrillics nice looking and easy.
I am a Slav and I am positively biassed against Cyrillics: it is the
invention of the "Slavic genius". But I try to be objective in my value
judgements. Cyrillic script is a religious import in Rumanian and that
time when the Old Church Slavonic was retired as a liturgic language in
Rumanian Church, it was the time also for Cyrillics to retire.
> Komi (both Zyrian and Permiak) didn't use Abur for at least 200 years
> when they got Cyrillic script.
There were very few Zyrian* works at all during this 200 years,
therefore, it is rather a gap in Zyrien culture than the presence of a
Cyrillic tradition. I know only three manuscripts and all of them are
translations from Russian (not originals): 1. Sluzhba bozhestvennaja na
zyrjanskom jazyke (1779-86), Bozhestvennaja sluzhba na zyrjanskom
jazyke (end of 18th cent.), Evangelija ot Matveja na vychegodskom
govore (A. Shergin, 1823). Its a period of denationalization conducted
by the Russian royal court. But it is politics, therefore I stop here.
The return of the post-Soviet nations to the Latin script is an act
of derussification, since Latin orthographies existed earlier only for
two decades among Azeris, Turkmens etc. From this ground, Zyrians also
could return to Abur (if they would be permitted to do this).
* In Hungarian Finno-Ugristics mainly external ethnonyms are used --
maintaining the terminology of early Hungarian researchers, and Zyrian
is used as pars pro toto. I follow this convention. However, Abur
existed only in strict Zyrian (Komi-Zyrian). Permiaks used this
language at that time as a literary language. The creation of a
distinct Permiak literary language is rather a political than a
lingustic issue.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:08:18 +0300
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hebrew spelling
Katav Steg Belsky:
> If it were a vowel-holder, the word would be _mod_.
Just as "rosh".
> If i remember correctly, there is a word _nod_ spelled with an alef in
> the middle.
Yep. That's correct.
-- Yitzik
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 09:53:15 -0400
From: David H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hebrew spelling
Well then, what about words without a yod, such as "Lhitra'ot" shouldn't
it have a yod between the he and tav? The same for mishpakhah...it's not
spelled with a yod between the mem and shin.
Thanks
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 09:43:53 -0400
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [4:] ~ [r]
Since [4] is a tap, and [r] is a trill, wouldn't [4:] be essentially the
same as [r]? Or is there a difference?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 10:26:54 -0400
From: Afian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: TECH: How to go nomail
How can I go nomail?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 11:06:42 -0400
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
Tamas Racsko scripsit:
> (* The most modern typesetting facilites tend the merge the two
> variants again, Rumanian |s,| in defined as s-cedilla in Latin-2
> codesets ISO-8859-2, Win-1250. Cedilla and comma-below are not
> distinguished in other specifications, e.g. rfc-1345.)
The Romanians have complained about this unification and have prevailed:
Unicode contains s-comma and t-comma now (leaving t-cedilla basically
useless), and there is also Latin-10 (ISO 8859-16), which contains
both s- and t-comma. In any event, almost all Turkish is encoded
in Latin-5 (ISO 8859-9), which unambiguously contains s-cedilla.
As for RFC 1345, it's obsolete.
--
There are three kinds of people in the world: John Cowan
those who can count, http://www.reutershealth.com
and those who can't. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:26:12 +0300
From: Steg Belsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hebrew spelling
On Sep 12, 2004, at 4:53 PM, David H wrote:
> Well then, what about words without a yod, such as "Lhitra'ot"
> shouldn't
> it have a yod between the he and tav? The same for mishpakhah...it's
> not
> spelled with a yod between the mem and shin.
> Thanks
I think that no yud is inserted there because _(le)hit-_ and _mi-_ are
common, easily recognized prefixes.
-Stephen (Steg)
"An orbit, after all, is just a plummet that keeps missing."
~ earth, by david brin
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 12:05:54 -0400
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: TECH: How to go nomail
Afian �rta: "How can I go nomail?"
http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conlang&A=1
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 12:12:11 -0400
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More orthographic miscellanea (was: Chinese Romanization)
Isaac A. Penzev scripsit:
> As for RF, the situation is different. It is ***forbidden by the federal
> law*** to use any other alphabet than based on Cyrillics, for the
> languages that have any official status in Russian Federation. Kazan
> Tatars want to change to Turkish-based Latinics, but Moscow does not
> permit to do it officially. The same is with Karelan - being written
> in Latinics, it demands official status (for now they use Finnish and
> Russian as official langauges of Republic of Karelia), bu it cannot
> be given until they change to Cyrillics.
I don't understand this. If only Cyrillic-script languages can be
official, how can Finnish be official? Is it simply because it has
official status in Finland and is written in Latin script there?
But Tatar has official status in China and is written in Latin
script there, so it seems that the law is being inconsistently
applied.
> They all seem nice and convenient (even a bit strange but etymologicly safe
> Azeri), tho often totally incompatible with each other. I think it was done
> for hardening mutual understanding between Turkic ethnoi.
Actually, I suspect that it was just a product of committees working
independently and without coordination. (Note: "harden" in English is
not a general causative, but applies only to the literal sense of "hard" =
"firm"; it cannot be applied in the sense "make [something] difficult".)
--
Income tax, if I may be pardoned for saying so, John Cowan
is a tax on income. --Lord Macnaghten (1901) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 12:15:14 -0400
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Those darn curly subscripts (was: More orthographic miscellanea)
Ray Brown scripsit:
> But it would surely have been very strange to have two diacritics which
> look so similar and not treat them the same way. Romanian has no |�|
> (c-cedilla), so putting a comma below |s| and |t| is quite consistent. But
> have a cedilla beneath |c| and a comma beneath |s| would be a tad odd.
> Even if the Turks had done this, all but the pedantic would surely have
> actually written the things the same way.
Fair enough.
> >The normative cedilla has a vertical descender
>
> Normative? Who sets the norm?
French and Portuguese typographers.
> "They are evidently confusing science with technology."
"No, no; your problem is that you're confusing a thing with *itself*."
--Marvin Minsky
--
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Any legal document draws most of its meaning from context. A telegram
that says 'SELL HUNDRED THOUSAND SHARES IBM SHORT' (only 190 bits in
5-bit Baudot code plus appropriate headers) is as good a legal document
as any, even sans digital signature." --me
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 10:49:00 -0600
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [4:] ~ [r]
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 09:43:53 -0400, Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since [4] is a tap, and [r] is a trill, wouldn't [4:] be essentially the
> same as [r]? Or is there a difference?
They might possibly be the same... but given the punctual nature of a tap, I'm not
sure if [4:] could really be said to mean anything (though /4:/ might--and I wouldnt
be surprised to find [r] there).
*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: 21
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:03:27 +0200
From: Carsten Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: LaTeX for Conlangers -- Question posted
Hey!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/latex-for-conlangers/message/503
I have posted that question already 4 weeks ago, but nobody has answered
yet. So I just wanted to notify you about that question.
-- Carsten
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:24:27 +0300
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hebrew spelling
Katav Steg Belsky:
> On Sep 12, 2004, at 4:53 PM, David H wrote:
> > Well then, what about words without a yod, such as "Lhitra'ot"
> > shouldn't
> > it have a yod between the he and tav? The same for mishpakhah...it's
> > not
> > spelled with a yod between the mem and shin.
> > Thanks
>
> I think that no yud is inserted there because _(le)hit-_ and _mi-_ are
> common, easily recognized prefixes.
They shouldn't have yod. The reason is in historic phonology: if two first
consonants were vocalized with vocal schwas, the first one turned into
hhirek / short [i], and the second one became silent, that is [EMAIL PROTECTED]@- >
CiC-,
so mishpahhah < [EMAIL PROTECTED]@pahhat. But those [i] are never written. The same is
true about such prefixes as hi- and hit-, and adding prepositions: [EMAIL PROTECTED] +
[EMAIL PROTECTED] > bivrit.
Cheers,
-- Yitzik
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 23
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 18:33:49 +0100
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Those darn curly subscripts (was: More orthographic miscellanea)
On Saturday, September 11, 2004, at 08:23 , Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:
> Ray Brown wrote:
>
>
>>> The normative cedilla has a vertical descender
>>
>>
>> Normative? Who sets the norm? I must admit that most cedillas I've seen
>> have the stroke slanting thus /
>>
>> The word is Spanish for "zedlet" (or "zeelet"), i.e. little zed/zee. It
>> did begin its life as a small hand-written Z, something like ʒ, beneath
>> the C, so the slanting descender makes historical sense.
>>
>
> Actually the original "zedilla" was like an upside-down ʒ.
> The association with the third letter of the alphabet is
> secondary.
That's not what the sources I have at hand say.
Two things are certain:
1. _cedilla_ is a diminutive of _ceda_, Spanish for _zed/zee_ (spelled
_zedilla_ and _zeda_ in earlier Spanish), i.e. little Z.
2. The graphy _cz_ was used in Medieval Spanish to show that the |c| was
'soft' before |a, o, u| (Old French also occasionally used thus graphy,
but _ce_ was more common; both have noe given way to |�| since the 16th
cent.) - the modern Spaniards just write |z|.
It is my understanding that the original _ce-zedila_ was exactly that: c
with a small z (written beneath it). I've checked my sources again today -
as far as I understand it, this is the origin of the cedilla/zedilla.
Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===============================================
"They are evidently confusing science with technology."
UMBERTO ECO September, 2004
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 13:31:38 -0400
From: Marcos Benitez Valle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Spanish ll in different dialects
Hello,
I'm not sure if this information will be helpful however, my country
(Mexico) has many dialects. Not just related to ethnicity but also related
to social class.
I currently live in the state of San Luis Potosi in the capital city of the
same name. Originally I came from Tapachula in the state of Chiapas.
The zh sound to which you refer is common in Chiapas but less so here in
San Luis. It seems to be more pronounced in words with the letter "y" but
still present in words with "ll".
Across the border in Guatemala, the zh is almost absent and is used as a
means of identifying people from Guatemala. (There is a lot of illegal
alien traffic on our southern border.)
I hope you find this information useful.
Marcos Benitez
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 10:49:19 -0700
From: Arthaey Angosii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Conlang Flag: Voting
Emaelivpeith Adrian Morgan:
> I've made some changes. The updated version can now be viewed and tried.
>
> http://gzarondar.freeserverhost.net/flagvote.php
Looks good! :)
--
AA
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
