The propa way to spel

John writes "I used 'e' after 'a' for the magic 'e' in 'wae' for 'weigh'." I thought it was Joe who was suggesting "wae". Are Joe and John one and the same? If so, why then would Joe retort "John, what are you talking about." There may be some underlying explanation but enough of that for the moment.

The magic "e" they write about. Now everyone who has passed primary school would realise that there has to be a consonant letter between the vowel letter which is being magicked and the magic "e" which is magicking it. The digraph "ae" is by no means an instance of the magic "e" except in the context of certain reform proposals which extend the rule. Such an extension, however, has no place in proposals which claim to stick to tradition.

If you're tinkering with spelling you should be sticking to tradition as much as possible. If you're going to break with tradition then be clear about the fact that what you're suggesting is a sweeping reform proposal. Here's what I mean by "tinkering".

http://b16.ezboard.com/feuropa2frm40.showMessage?topicID=10.topic

CUPBOARD

"cupboard" - "cubburd" verses "cubberd" verses "cubord"

Joe reads "cubord" as [kju:bo:rd]. Does he read "wizard" as [waiza:rd]?

I believe that careful examination of English orthography would show that the letter "o" doesn't generally act as a magic "e".

It should also show that the second syllable of a two syllable word tends to be unstressed. Thus whether it's "ar", "er", "ir", "or" or "ur" it should tend to be pronounced [..(r)].

So why choose "or" over any of the others? It's a question of etymology. I say that there is more to spelling than just representing the phonemes of speech. "Cupboard" is "cup" plus "board", "cubord" preserves more of this especially if you're respelling "board" as "bord".

That said, I'd agree that "cubberd" is better than "cubburd". I think that "er" is better suited to repesenting [..(r)] than "ur" is.

I think "cubord" is better. Why use "ur" when it's not [e:(r)]? You don't need a double "b": you don't have a double "z" in wizard.

I'm not quite sure what a [kju:bo:rd] is. ''Cubberd'' would probably work better. Both ''cubberd'' and ''cubbord'' work but ''cubord'' looks like [kju:bo:rd].

AGAIN

again - agen

"That looks like it should be pronounced [eij..n]. 'aggen' works better." Joe has a point. Let's go with "aggen".

"E"S NOT NEEDED

owe-oe
eye-ie

Both of these work fine as I've written and Joe's reason to choose these over "o" and "i" (avoiding homographs) is fair enough. Thanks, Joe, for clarifying this. But he asks "... but you don't like the idea of spelling 'you' as 'u'. Is spelling 'owe' and 'eye' as 'o' and 'i' any different." Yes, I think that it's very different. If I see "o" and "i" alone I think [Ou] and [ai] but if I see "u" I think [u:] not [ju:]

MAM

ma'am-mam

Fair enough "mam" isn't too bad.

MORE WORDS ON JOE'S LIST THAT I'M IN DOUBT ABOUT

rigatoni-riggatonee
garage-gurrahj
new-noo
species-speeshies
iguana-igwaana
phonetic-fanetic
receipt-reseat
Nevada-Nevaada
Chicago-Shicaago
Tomato-tomayto
potato-potayto
Colorado-Coloraado
pecan-pecaan
route-rout
twenty-twunty
sign-sine
drawer-dror
encore-oncor
ignore-ignor
whore-hor

As to why, that'll have to wait: I've got to go.

Yes, I think that it's very different. If I see "o" and "i" alone I think [Ou] and [ai] but if I see "u" I think [u:] not [ju:].


So, then, do you pronounce ''menu'' as [menu:]. I say [menju:] men-you.

Smith is asking you on that other thread but I'm wondering too how encyclopedia is spelled in your system. ''Ensieklupeedee'u'' is how it comes out in some systems.

Yeah, I've been comparing Neytoe Inglish to some other spelling reform on this thread, http://pub103.ezboard.com/feuropa2frm40.showMessage?topicID=37.topic, and I've been wondering how much better Jim thinks that spelling reform is than Neytoe Inglish. It does spell ''court'' as ''koert'' and ''what'' as ''whut''. Does ''koert'' look funny like John says? Yeah, In their system it's ''ensieklupeedee'u'' and in Neytoe Inglish it's ''ensiyklupeydeyu''. Odd, aren't they? ''koert'' may seem like an odd spelling but it's there for people that make the [o:r], [Our] distinction.

This is page 3 of the thread where I comparing the two systems http://b16.ezboard.com/feuropa2frm40.showMessageRange?topicID=37.topic&start=41&stop=60 .

four-forr
hind-hiend
mind-miend
pint-pinte
cold-coald
bold-boald
mild-mield
wild-wield

realtor-reeluhter
pueblo-pweblo
raspberry-razzberry

I pronounce ''keyboard'' as [ki:bo:rd] not [b..rd] at the end. I'd respell that as ''keebord'' so why spell ''cupboard'' as ''cubord'' or ''cubbord''? ''keebord'' would have ''bord'' at the end of it.

I pronounce ''menu'' as [menju:] but this is an established spelling. It like many of the words in English doesn't conform to the usual rules of orthography. To respell "you" as "u" would be to introduce a new spelling. If you're introducing new spellings shouldn't you be sticking to the usual rules (unless your implimenting a whloe new set of them)?

Although "u" for [ju:] may exist in English orthography it is the exception rather than the rule just like "ae" for [ei]. If you're basing your reform on exceptions you might as well spell "fish" as "ghoti".

Well, I can see the logic of "cubberd" (but not "cubburd") but I still think that "cubord" would do fine. Are we trying to make things 100% phonemic? That would have it's problems. So if you insist on "cubberd", then what about "wizard"? Shouldn't "wizard" become "wizzerd"?

In my phonemic system "encyclopaedia" becomes "ensieclypeedia". How do you think it compares to the odd ''ensieklupeedee'u'' or ''ensiyklupeydeyu''? There's room in my system for those who make the [o:(r)] / [Ou(r)] distinction. In my system "court" would then become "coart" (at least for them). This is a difficulty, though, because I don't know which words should be [o:(r)] and which should be [Ou(r)]. I only use [o:(r)].

I think most of the people that use [Our] use it for ''ore'', ''oar'', and ''our'' combinations and pronounce ''or'' as [o:r].

[Our] is unimportant in spelling.

Is spelling reform crap?

''The four people in the court room had to go to court for four days so they went through the door to the court room.'' In the system that Smith is comparing to N/I/. ''Dhu foer peepul in dhu koert room had too goe too koert for foer daez soe dhae went throo dhu doer too dhu koert room.''

In the system that I was talking about.

''Thu for peepul in thu kort room had too goe too kort for for daez soe dhae went tthroo thu dor too thu kort room.

Which one's easier to read. I think this system that I'm talking about is better than the one that Smith was talking about on the other thread because for one thing it's easier to read and doesn't use crazy ''dh''.

Anyway, here's that system that I was mentioning on that other thread.

I just recently got this sample from another system. Here's there system.

bdfghjklmnprstvwyz-use unchanged

Short vowels
a-cat
e-get
i-sit
o-cot
u-cup
uu-book

Long Vowels
aa-father
au-caught
ee-speed
oo-moon
ue-mute

Diphthongs
ae-day
ai-yeah = yai
ea-idea = iedea
ie-pie
oe-home
oi-coin
ou-mount

R-vowel sounds
ar-[a:r]-car
air-air, care
eer-steer
or-[o:r]-for, form, storm
oer-[Our]-four, more, board
ur-[e:r]-bird, burn
uer-pure, cure

Consonant Diphthongs
ch-chart
dh-there
gh-yogh
hh-glottal stop
kh-loch
ng-thing, sing
nn-grand prix, contretemps = graann pree, kontrutaann
sh-shine
th-thin
wh-what
zh-genre, vision

Which system do you think is better? How much better do you think this system is then Neytoe Inglish.

Now back to this sentence,

"What my father told the court he had wanted was not to be caught with a quart of water in the cot of his daughter all hidden away in the cart of his brother."

In neytoe inglish.

"Wut miy fodr toeld du kort hey had wuntid wuz not too bey kot with u kort uv wotr in du kot uv hiz dotr ol hidun uway in du kart uv hiz brudr."

In your system.

"Whot mi faadher toald dha cort he had wontyd woz not tu be caut with a quort ov wauter in dha cot ov hiz dauter aul hidyn yway in dha cart ov hiz brudher."

In their system.

''Whut mie faadhur toeld dhu koert hee had wontid wuz not too bee kaut with u kwort uv wautur in dhu kot uv hiz dautur aul hidun uwae in dhu kart uv hiz brudhur.

Which do you think works the best and is the easiest to read?

An interesting thing about their system was that in their consonant diagrams they had the diagram ''nn'' and the words ''grand prix'' and ''contretemps''. When I saw that I was wondering what sound it was. I did some searching on the web and it seems to be some rare sound that occurs in the words ''grand prix'' and ''contretemps''. Here is some more information about it,

Quote-This simple indicates that a preceding vowel or diphthong is pronounced with the nasal passages open, as in ''contretemps''.

Here are some samples of the words ''grand prix'' and ''contretemps'' with the sound.




grand prix

www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/audio...grand+prix

contretemps

www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/audio...ontretemps

Here are these words in the dictionary.

www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dicti...ontretemps

Grand Prix

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/audio.pl?grandp06.wav=grand+prix

Contretemps

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/audio.pl?contre04.wav=contretemps

Here are these words in the dictionary.

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=contretemps

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

This is how their system respells this sentence.

"That quick beige fox jumped in the air over each thin dog. Look out, I shout, for he's foiled you again and then they went to see the four lochs and they had to write down a yogh and they went to see the grand prix and all of those things and yeah it was a good idea.

Their system

''Dhat kwik baezh foks jumpt in thu air oevur eech thin dog. Luuk out, ie shout, for heez foi'uld ue ugen and dhen dhae went too see dhu foer lokhs and dhae had too riet u yoegh and dhae went too see dhu graann pree and aul uv dhoez thingz and yai, it wuz u guud iedea.

This is how it would seem to have to come out in Neytoe Inglish.

''Dat kwik bazy foks jumpt in du er oevr eych thin dog. Look out ie showt, for heyz foyld ue ugen and den day went too sey du for loks and day had too riyt u yoeg and day went too see du gron pree and ol uv doez thingz.

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

It seems like the things that their system includes that Neytoe Inglish leaves out are [o], [o:], [W], [e..], [i..], [K], [G], [?], [Our] and the ''nn''. Also their system makes a distinguishment between [TH] and [d], and and [u:].

''This simple indicates that a preceding vowel or diphthong is pronounced with the nasal passages open, as in ''contretemps''. I think ''this simple'' should be ''this symbol'

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

An interesting thing is that what they represent as ''nn'' does not itself represent a nasal consonant but it is used to show that a proceeding vowel is nasalized.

Now the question is, What is a good symbol to use to show that a vowel is nasalized in phonemic transcription. The IPA symbol is a tilde placed directly over the nasalized vowel. But, I'd use something better than that, something more like a dictionary symbol. It seems like [n] and [N] are both taken over so I'll use [n:]. What do you think about that symbol that I made up?

This is how the dictionary describes the pronunciation of these words.
grand prix [gra:n: pri:]
contretemps [ka:ntr..ta:n:] or [kontr..ta:n:]