Problems With The The Antimoon ASCII alphabet

Fisher   Sunday, October 03, 2004, 13:39 GMT
I've just had a look at Tom's phonemic alphabet and there are a few problems with it,

This is the chart

http://www.antimoon.com/how/pronunc-ascii.htm

The phonemes it lists

^ cup, luck Amer
a: arm, father Amer / Brit
@ cat, black Amer
e met, bed Amer
.. away, cinema Amer
e:(r) turn, learn Amer / Brit
i hit, sitting Amer
i: see, heat Amer
o hot, rock Amer / Brit
o: call, four Amer / Brit
u put, could Amer
u: blue, food Amer
ai five, eye Amer
au now, out Amer
Ou go, home Amer
e..(r) where, air Amer / Brit
ei say, eight Amer
i..(r) near, here Amer / Brit
oi boy, join Amer
u..(r) pure, tourist Amer / Brit
b bad, lab Amer
d did, lady Amer
f find, if Amer
g give, flag Amer
h how, hello Amer
j yes, yellow Amer
k cat, back Amer
l leg, little Amer
m man, lemon Amer
n no, ten Amer
N sing, finger Amer
p pet, map Amer
r red, try Amer
s sun, miss Amer
S she, crash Amer
t tea, getting Amer
tS check, church Amer
th think, both Amer
TH this, mother Amer
v voice, five Amer
w wet, window Amer
z zoo, lazy Amer
Z pleasure, vision Amer
dZ just, large Amer
i(:) happy, ready, merry, carry
.l little, uncle
.n written, listen

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

The problem is that there are phonemes missing.

Tom includes [i(:)] in as in ''happy'', ''buddy'', and ''merry'' but doesn't include the [ju(:)] in calculator, occupy, evacuate, ambulance etc. Where's the logic in that?

Tom's chart does not include the voiceless velar fricative in ''loch''. Tom could use [K].

Tom's chart does not include the voiceless [w] that some Scots use in ''wh'' words like ''when'', ''which'', ''where'', ''wheel'', ''why'', ''what'', ''whiskey'' etc. Tom could use [W].

Tom's chart includes [e..(r)], [i..(r)] and [u..(r)] but does not include the [o..(r)] that some Britons use in words like ''four'', ''core'', ''wore'' and ''hoarse'' to distinguish them from ''for'', ''corps'', ''war'' and ''horse''. What sense does it make to overlook [o..(r)]?

Also,

Tom, Why does your chart use diagraphs for the ''th'' sound in ''think'' and the ''th'' sound in ''then''. Wouldn't [T] for ''think'' and [D] for ''then'' be better? How can I write the pronunciation of ''lighthouse'' if I have to use [th] for the ''th'' in ''think''?

Why does your chart use [j] for the ''y'' sound in ''yes'' rather than [y]. [y] would be a better choice because [j] could confuse foreigners and other people because it looks like [dZ].

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

Tom, your chart is missing a few phonemes. It's not complete. If your chart included the four phonemes mentioned by me above it would better fit more accents.

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

P.S., I wonder how many people agree with my objections to Tom's phonemic chart?
Fisher   Sunday, October 03, 2004, 13:46 GMT
''(r) [ka:(r)] means [ka:r] in American English, and [ka:] in British English.''

Here's another objection I have to Tom's chart. It falsely tells foreigners that all British accents are non-rhotic. That is very untrue. In fact, most British accents are not non-rhotic.

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

Tom, wouldn't it be better to say ''(r) [ka:(r)] means [ka:r] in American English, and [ka:] in Southern England English.''

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

Tom, people from Scotland and Northern England don't say [ka:] for ''car''. They'd call you wrong.
Fish head   Sunday, October 03, 2004, 14:22 GMT
It doesn't tell foreigners that all British accents are non-rhotic, just like it doesn't tell foreigners that all American accents are rhotic. However, British accents are generally non-rhotic, just as American accents, for the most part, are rhotic.
Fish head   Sunday, October 03, 2004, 14:27 GMT
"The voiceless velar fricative in ''loch'' and the voiceless [w] and the [o..(r)] that some Britons"

So why bother with them if hardly anyone speaks them? You'll always find some unusual phoneme in some remote place that 99% of the English speaking world don't pronounce.
Fisher   Sunday, October 03, 2004, 18:34 GMT
''It doesn't tell foreigners that all British accents are non-rhotic, just like it doesn't tell foreigners that all American accents are rhotic. However, British accents are generally non-rhotic, just as American accents, for the most part, are rhotic.''

Fish head, There are many many British accents that are rhotic. Scottish Accents are rhotic. They pronounce ''car'' as [ka:r] not [ka:] so, why should Tom falsely tell foreigners that car is pronounce [ka:] always in Briton.
Tremmert   Sunday, October 03, 2004, 18:39 GMT
Methinks that by 'British' he meant 'RP'.
Fish Brain   Monday, October 04, 2004, 00:36 GMT
Fisher is just here to stir up some shit but I think he has a point about the [ju(:)].
Tom   Monday, October 04, 2004, 17:32 GMT
"doesn't include the [ju(:)] in calculator, occupy, evacuate, ambulance etc."

calculator, occupy, ambulance -- these words do not contain the [ju:] sound. They have either [ju] or [j..].
evacuate, situation... -- these words are rare

"Where's the logic in that?"

The logic is that [i(:)] is 1000s of times more frequent than [u(:)]. I don't want to scare off beginners by including too many symbols.


"Tom's chart does not include the voiceless velar fricative in ''loch''."

Go ahead and use [x]. I'm giving you a free license to use it.


"Tom's chart does not include the voiceless [w] that some Scots use"
"What sense does it make to overlook [o..(r)]? "

The alphabet is designed to cover BBC English and General American, not every single regional variety of English.


"Wouldn't [T] for ''think'' and [D] for ''then'' be better?"

This has already been discussed in this Forum. Please use the search box in the top-right corner of this page.


"How can I write the pronunciation of ''lighthouse''?"

['lait haus]


"Why does your chart use [j] for the ''y'' sound in ''yes'' rather than [y]."

Where possible, we've tried to follow the IPA.
Fisher   Monday, October 04, 2004, 19:07 GMT
''The alphabet is designed to cover BBC English and General American, not every single regional variety of English.''

What if someone visiting this forum has an accent with those sounds that you've not included in your chart? How would they be able to transcribe their accent?
Tom   Tuesday, October 05, 2004, 00:30 GMT
They could design their own alphabet.
Fish head   Wednesday, October 06, 2004, 04:33 GMT
"Fish head, There are many many British accents that are rhotic.

Fisher, there are many many American accents that are non-rhotic. i.e. New Yorker, New Englander, US Southerner, EBONICS. So what?


"Scottish Accents are rhotic.
So too are Irish, generally.


"They pronounce ''car'' as [ka:r] not [ka:] so, why should Tom falsely tell foreigners that car is pronounce [ka:] always in Briton."

Tom says no such thing.