|
|
Spelling Reform Thread
From the last page, ''So, If we replace all of the diagraphs with new letters, Should these sounds be ignored?''
''So once again, If we replace all of the diagraphs with new letters, Should these sounds be ignored? These distinctions?''
And that leads to a second question. If there is a phonemic spelling reform should those distinctions that I mentioned on page 4 of this thread be ignored?
And also those distinctions that Oliver mentioned.
''Loch'' and ''Oliver'', I think Jim's system makes all those distinctions you all were talking about and yeah, retaining the ''h'' in ''whale'' in a phonemic spelling system is redundant. Inglish speling's system is much better than Jim's.
As to the question, ''If we replace all of the diagraphs with new letters, Should the distinctions that Loch mentioned and the three distinctions that Oliver mentioned?
The fourth one Oliver mentioned is a distinction that everyone makes between ''fool'' and ''fuel'', ''mute'' and ''moot'' etc.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Well, the answer to that question is probably yes, because if we didn't ignore those distinctions, our keyboards would just get much much bigger. Wouldn't people rather ignore those distinctions than have to get a bigger keyboard? Jim, If you didn't ignore those distinctions then you would just find yourself with a huge keyboard. I'm not sure if such a keyboard would even fit on my computer table. So, the answer to that question is, If we replace all of the diagraphs with new letters then we should ignore those distinctions that Loch mentioned and the three ''besides the fourth one which everyone makes'' that Oliver mention because otherwise, we would have to have a huge keyboard. I wonder if they would give people a free new keyboard if the keyboard was expanded.
Oliver,
Okay, I understand where you're coming from but I think your approach is bound to run into strife somewhere down the track.
You suggest using the Shavian alphabet but removing some letters or marking them as secondary. The letters which are targetted are those for sounds not used by everybody, "that you only need to pronounce English with a particular regional accent."
Four of these letters are On, Ian, Err and Yew*. They correspond to /o/, /i(:)../, /e:(r)/ and /ju:/. As Loch points out /ju:/ is used by everybody. As far as I know, so is /i(:)../. Americans certainly use /e:(r)/, infact most of us do. The ones who don't seem to use it are the Scots.
The interesting one, though, is /o/. Sure, North Americans don't use it but could you call it a sound "that you only need to pronounce English with a particular regional accent."? Hardly ... unless you consider Australia, New Zealand, Africa and much of the British Isles one region.
More trouble raises its head when you consider all the other mergers that some people make. Some merge /TH/ & /d/ and merge /th/ and /t/. Others merge /TH/ & /v/ and merge /th/ & /f/. If were using only letters for sounds used by everyone we'd have to get rid of They and Thigh.
In some dialects there is no /N/ phoneme. Some merge /a:/, /o/ and /o:/. Others merge /a:/ and /@/. For me "lore" and "law" are homonyms as are "farther" and "father". "Sofa" and "loafer" rhyme for me as do "newer" and "tour". If you include only letters for sounds that everybody uses, you'll be ending up with a really small alphabet.
* For the names of Shavian letters I'm using
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shavian_alphabet
Some dialects have no ''h'' phoneme so does that mean we should remove the letter ''h'' from the alphabet. I don't think so. Also, Most of us split [^] and [u] but in some dialects there's no split.
Jim, If we replace all of the diagraphs with new letters should those three distinctions that Oliver mention and those other distinctions that Loch mentioned be ignored? If we don't ignore them then we'll have to get huge keyboards. Do you think people would be able to get the new expanded huge keyboards for free. Will they give out new keyboards for free?
Also, Does your spelling proposal include all those distinctions that Oliver and Loch mentioned on page four of this thread? Truespel sure doesn't and that's a good thing. Loch suggests distinguishing ''tenor'' and ''tenner'' by writing ''tenor'' as ''tenyr'' and ''tenner'' as ''teonyr'' with his odd ''yr''. These are his respellings,
ten-ten [ten]
tenor-tener [ten..r]
tenner-tenner [tEn..r]
He's using ''eo'' for [E]. The longer vowel the distinguishers use in ''tenner''.
Anyway, Now speaking of redundant letters, this is Loch's alphabet which is extended to include a few more letters.
a-father
b-book
ç-chart, church, witch
d-dog
e-elephant
f-food
g-good
h-hook
i-is
j-jet
k-cat
l-lip
m-man
n-no
o-top
p-pool
þ-think
r-red
s-stove
t-tiger
u-under
v-vent
w-wet
ð-them, that, then, this
y-yes
z-zebra
æ-cat
ø-arrest, about, soda, permit ''the verb''.
œ-home, goat, goer, float, boat
š-ship, shield, fish, wish, chef, machine
Ð-tied, kneed, allowed, tried, stayed ''The letter that looks like a lowercase ''d'' and a lowercase ''t'' put together ''which is different from eth''
ï-lenin, cabin, possible, bizarre, visit, wanted, needed, carpet, manage, private, amplifier, horrible. ''Unstressed [i] or [..]'' This letter would represent an unstressed [i] for some people, [..] for others, and for some it would represent both unstressed [i] and [..].
ž-genre, vision, rouge, beige, measure
é-happy, body, money, tiny, funny, sunny, cookie, cookies
ŋ-sing, thing, ringing, singing, finger = ''the ''eng'' letter used in the IPA to represent this sound that I can't type.
Do you think there are any redundant letters in Loch's alphabet. I'd say that this one
''Ð-tied, kneed, allowed, tried, stayed ''The letter that looks like a lowercase ''d'' and a lowercase ''t'' put together ''which is different from eth''' is redundant. The majority of us make no distinction between ''tied'' and ''tide''.
Hear are the names that Loch has given to the letters added to the extended alphabet? How would it sound to say this alphabet? You can't sing it with the traditional alphabet song. here it is,
a-ay
b-bee
ç-chee
d-dee
e-eeh
f-ef
g-jee
h-aitch
i-ie
j-jay
k-kay
l-el
m-em
n-en
o-oe
p-pee
þ-thorn
r-ar
s-es
t-tee
u-yoo
v-vee
w-double yoo
ð-eth
y-wye
z-zee
æ-ash
ø-schwa [Swa:]
œ-oash
š-esh
Ð-toad
ï-ish
ž-ezh
é-schwi [Swi:]
ŋ-eng
Hi Jim
Please remember I am not eliminating letters, I am merely marking them as problematical and so secondary.
If you want to spell something phonetically and you know that your message will be understood better, by using the letters common to all English accents, why not.
Okay, I can see the four letter, that I gave as an example of secondary letters are the sticking point, so lets go over them. Perhaps one or more should be included back in with the Basic English sounds.
The 4 letters are On, Ian, Err and Yew*. They correspond to /o/,
/i(:)../, /e:(r)/ and /ju:/.
The major one, though, is /o/. North Americans don't use it and can not distinguish it from the "Ah" sound. They pronounce "Ah" for their soft o sound. This is one factor, which gives American English its particular regional accent.
And because in much of Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Africa and South Africa people commonly pronounce the "Ah" sound as their soft a, every body get all confused.
We can't eliminate these variant pronounciations, but why throw another letter /o/ into this muddle, so people won't be able to figure out what is happening.
Yew, /ju:/ is used by everybody, but it is really a merge of 2 sounds.
Yea /j/ + Ooze /u:/ so as it can be spelled accurately with 2 letters, it is hardly a basic letter. But it so common in English, and pretty universal, so if you wish we could added to the basic group.
Ian /i(:)../ is also a merge of 2 sounds /i:/ + '..', and it can be found in most English accents, but it is more common in Non-Rhotic pronunciations where it substutes for other basic sounds. So it adds to the muddle and should be used sparingly.
Americans certainly don't use Err /e:(r)/, but they can't consistently distinguish it from the simpler "er" sound which is called Array in the Shaw Alphabet.
In AscII it is only referred to in the Antimoon footnotes. Apparently in British English it is alway pronounced as a Schwa.
In fact the Shaw Letter name Err is misleading. In American English Err is a homohym with Air, another sound entirely.
It looks like the ASCII teaching Alphabet merges those "er" sounds (urge, answer) in any case, so I am just following their lead.
If you include only letters for sounds that everybody uses,
then as you see their will be much less confusion for the Americans.
And as for ending up with a really small alphabet, I don't see 45 as too small. I like the extra R letters, Ear, Are, Air, Or, and Array, because it allows you to isolate the Non-Rhotic/Rhotic Difference to just 5 letters.
The Shaw Alphabet has a lot for the British too.
Regards, Paul V.
P.S. There is lots of room for mapping the Shavian Letters onto the IBM PC Keyboard with out having to use Diagraphs. We have 3 set of bracket Keys,
a bunch of accent keys which are no longer used and a lot of funny special characters. I prefer to use Upper case letters when there is an obvious relationship with the lower case letter.
N for ng, C for CH, S for sh, W for Wh, Z for j (Jean), T for th, etc.
* For the names of Shavian letters I'm using
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shavian_alphabet
Correction!
I meant to say
Americans certainly do use Err /e:(r)/, but in a haphazard fashion. They can't consistently distinguish it from the simpler "er" sound which is called Array in the Shaw Alphabet. They use the "er" sound a lot at the end of a
word without losing the R sound. (Answer, miner, minor, girl, barber)
NOT
Americans certainly don't use Err /e:(r)/, but they can't consistently distinguish it from the simpler "er" sound which is called Array in the Shaw Alphabet.
''Yew, /ju:/ is used by everybody, but it is really a merge of 2 sounds.
Yea /j/ + Ooze /u:/ so as it can be spelled accurately with 2 letters, it is hardly a basic letter. But it so common in English, and pretty universal, so if you wish we could added to the basic group.'' Paul, If you're going to say that then what about [dZ] and [tS]? Should they be spelled with two letters. I'd say no, because that would just make a whole bunch of words longer. Also, if you don't use a letter for [ju:] than a lot of words like ''united states'', ''unite'', ''union'' etc. would become longer.
Jim says-''Loch uses "er", "ir" and "ur". This leaves him with the odd looking "yr" for /..(r)/. Sould you adopt this? You don't have to: you could use "er" like I do (this is the norm in traditional orthography anyway). But you're using "er" for something else ...''
''This brings me to the next thing I'm not so keen on about your system. You respell "chair", "hair", "air", "pair", etc. as "cher", "her", "er", "per", etc. Loch and I leave them as they are. I think, for ease-of-reading's sake, they are better left as they are.''
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Jim, well, they're actually pronounced that way in rhotic accents. [tSer], [her], [er] and [per]. So, what's wrong with ''er''? And, besides, doesn't your crazy system spell them with ''er''? And, also, if you're spelling [..r] as ''er'' wouldn't that mean that ''fern'' would have to be spelled ''furn'' in your system?
Quote-''Here's one way in which Loch's proposal differes from yours.''
''TRADITIONAL ORTHOGRAPHY
day, plate, late, skate, eight''
''LOCH'S SYSTEM
dai, pleit, leit, skeit, ait''
''YOUR SYSTEM
dae, plaet, laet, skaet, aet''
''MY SYSTEM
day, pleit, leit, skeit, ait''
Quote-''Loch uses "ei" and "ai" whereas you use "ae". I think that both "ei" and "ai" are a whole lot easier to read than "ae". In my system "ay" and "ey" are also used.''
Quote-''Yours is not the only system to use "ae" but I think this is one of the worst spelling reform suggestions proposed.''
''Also Loch and I make a distinction that exists in some dialects. No everyone pronounces "eight", "maid", "vain", etc. like "ate", "made", vane", etc.''
''These and many other distinctions are ignored by your system but made by Loch's. I wouldn't accept a system that ignores distinctions that I make; why expect others to accept one that ignores distinctions that they make?''
If your including those distinctions then what about ''tenor'' vs. ''tenner''. Loch's system respells ''tenor'' as ''tenyr'' and ''tenner'' as ''teoner''.
And also what about these distinctions that Oliver and Loch mentioned?
For example The''Wh'' in ''which'' and ''whew''.
ch in Loch
ll in Welsh - ''voiceless ''l''
o in cot
au in caught
a in , daze, pane, mane, ate= ''A monophthong used by some Northern Irish people that distinguish these words from ''maid'', ''days'', ''pain'', ''main'' and ''eight''. [A].
o in toe, sole, nose, groan=A ''A monophthong used by people from Liverpool people that distinguish these words from ''tow'', ''soul'', ''knows'' and ''grown''. [O].
e in tenner ''used by some Northern Irish people that distinguish this word from ''tenor'' by using a longer vowel.'' [E].
nd-in ''grand prix''.
ny-in ''canyon'' and ''gn'' in ''lasagna'' pronounced by some people with a palatal nasal sound, [J] in Sampa instead of [nj]. Pronounced by them with a sound different to the ''ni'' [nj], in ''opinion'', ''companion'', ''onion'' etc.
ea-in ''meat'', ''sea'', ''leak'' and ''real'-pronounced with [i..] in some part of the British Isles to distinguish them from ''meet'', ''see'', ''leak'' and ''reel''.
a-in ‘’bad’’, ‘’sad’’, ‘’jam’’ meaning ‘fruit conserve’, ‘’can’’ ‘’tin’’ or the verb ‘’can’’, and ‘’halve’’ for some people from Southern England which they pronounce with a longer vowel sound than the ‘’a’’ sound in ‘’cat’’. [@:]. For them, ‘’bad’’ and ‘’lad’’ don’t rhyme. Also, they have minimal pairs between ‘’can’’ meaning ‘’able to’’ and ‘’can’’ – ‘’a metal container’’ or ‘’ to put into a can’’ and ‘’jam’’ ‘’fruit conserve’’ and ‘’jam’’ meaning ‘’crush’’ and also ‘’have’’ vs. ‘’halve’’.
Eu-in rude, rheum, threw, brewed, chews, chute, lute, luce, suit, and flew used by some Welsh people. Where we have ‘’yod dropping’’ they use a different vowel sound in to distinguish them from other words so, for them rude and rood, rheum - room, threw - through, brewed - brood, chews - choose, chute - shoot, lute - loot, luce - loose, suit – soot, flew – flu, and the vowels of glue - gloom, blue – bloom and the vowel in June are distinguished by them.
i-in libel ‘’ For some Scots, ‘’libel’’ and ‘’bible’’ don’t rhyme. The vowel in ‘’bible’’ is like the [ai] in other words and the vowel in ‘’libel’’ is different, the diphthong changes in ‘’libel’’ for them.’’
d-in tied, kneed, allowed, stayed etc. ''For some Scots there's a distinction between ''tied and tide'', ''staid and stayed''. The diphthong changes in the past tenses. My spelling reform proposal system uses ''dd'' for past tenses for words that end in a vowel sound, but someone could add the letter that looks like a lowercase ''t'' and a lowercase ''d'' put together for those past tenses, like is shown in my extended alphabet ''which is different to eth.''
[C]-in ''human'', ''huge'', ''humor'', ''humongus'' etc. ''A voiceless ''y'' used by some people in words like ''human'', ''huge'', ''humor'', ''humongus'' etc. instead of ''hy'' [hj]. I'm using [C] from Sampa. Those words start with a different phoneme for them.
Unstressed [i]-in lenin, cabin, possible, bizarre, visit, wanted, needed, carpet, manage, private, amplifier, horrible. Some people make a distinction between ''lennon'' and ''lenin'' and also ''bazaar'' and ''bizarre''.
Loch adds the letter ''ï'' to his extended alphabet and makes a post about the letter. This is his post,
Quote-''The letter ''ï'' is used in some words where some people use [..] and some people use the [i] sound in ''kit''. The ''i's'' that are pronounce [..] by most of us are pronounced like the ''i'' sound in ''kit'' by some ''except before ''l'' and ''r'' where the sound is always [..] for everyone. So, that ''lennon'' and ''lenin'' and ''bazaar'' and ''bizarre'' are distinguished. Also, for Americans and Britons [i] occurs in past tense ''ed'' endings and plural ''es'' endings and for some people in ''et'', ''age'' and ''ate'' endings. So, in unstressed syllables where either [..] or [i] can be used, the letter ''ï'' is used. ''America'' becomes ''Ømerïkø''. [i] is never used in ''en'' endings so, they become ''øn''.'' ''ï'' for some people would represent an unstressed [i] and for some people it would represent [..] and for some people it would represent both unstressed [i] and schwa.
See - http://www.hi.is/~peturk/KENNSLA/87/VARS/WVMerger.html
Does your system include these distinctions? If not then why include the [A] vs. [ei] distinction?
''Does your system include these distinctions? If not then why include the [A] vs. [ei] distinction?''
Also, if not then why include ''wh'' vs. ''w''? Why respell ''white'' as ''whiet'' instead of just ''wiet''?
"nothing new" you say ... I've just read your link and it says that the spelling was invented in the late nineteenth century. In terms of spelling I'd call that pretty new.
Moreover, it was coined by a businessman rather than coming down to us through tradition.
But the bigger problem with "ae" as opposed to "ai"/"ay" or "ei"/"ey" is that it just doesn't look right. It doesn't look right because it is so uncommon.
Which is easier to read "chain" or "chaen", "vain" or "vaen", "train" or "traen", "rain" or "raen", etc.? Forget this "ae" nonesense; "ai", "ay", "ei" and "ey" are all far better choices.
Yeah, Probably so, but, why use both?
If your including the distinction between ''eight'' and ''ate'', ''vain'' and ''vane'', ''made'' and ''maid'' etc. made by some people from Northern Ireland, then what about ''tenor'' vs. ''tenner''. Loch's system respells ''tenor'' as ''tenyr'' and ''tenner'' as ''teonyr''. Is that how they're spelled in your system?
And, also if your including that distinction then what about these distinctions that Oliver and Loch were mentioning?
These are the sounds that they were calling optional sounds.
''The''Wh'' in ''which'' and ''whew''.
ch in Loch
ll in Welsh - ''voiceless ''l''
o in cot
au in caught
a in , daze, pane, mane, ate= ''A monophthong used by some Northern Irish people that distinguish these words from ''maid'', ''days'', ''pain'', ''main'' and ''eight''. [A].
o in toe, sole, nose, groan=A ''A monophthong used by people from Liverpool people that distinguish these words from ''tow'', ''soul'', ''knows'' and ''grown''. [O].
e in tenner ''used by some Northern Irish people that distinguish this word from ''tenor'' by using a longer vowel.'' [E].
nd-in ''grand prix''.
ny-in ''canyon'' and ''gn'' in ''lasagna'' pronounced by some people with a palatal nasal sound, [J] in Sampa instead of [nj]. Pronounced by them with a sound different to the ''ni'' [nj], in ''opinion'', ''companion'', ''onion'' etc.
ea-in ''meat'', ''sea'', ''leak'' and ''real'-pronounced with [i..] in some part of the British Isles to distinguish them from ''meet'', ''see'', ''leak'' and ''reel''.
a-in ‘’bad’’, ‘’sad’’, ‘’jam’’ meaning ‘fruit conserve’, ‘’can’’ ‘’tin’’ or the verb ‘’can’’, and ‘’halve’’ for some people from Southern England which they pronounce with a longer vowel sound than the ‘’a’’ sound in ‘’cat’’. [@:]. For them, ‘’bad’’ and ‘’lad’’ don’t rhyme. Also, they have minimal pairs between ‘’can’’ meaning ‘’able to’’ and ‘’can’’ – ‘’a metal container’’ or ‘’ to put into a can’’ and ‘’jam’’ ‘’fruit conserve’’ and ‘’jam’’ meaning ‘’crush’’ and also ‘’have’’ vs. ‘’halve’’.
Eu-in rude, rheum, threw, brewed, chews, chute, lute, luce, suit, and flew used by some Welsh people. Where we have ‘’yod dropping’’ they use a different vowel sound in to distinguish them from other words so, for them rude and rood, rheum - room, threw - through, brewed - brood, chews - choose, chute - shoot, lute - loot, luce - loose, suit – soot, flew – flu, and the vowels of glue - gloom, blue – bloom and the vowel in June are distinguished by them.
i-in libel ‘’ For some Scots, ‘’libel’’ and ‘’bible’’ don’t rhyme. The vowel in ‘’bible’’ is like the [ai] in other words and the vowel in ‘’libel’’ is different, the diphthong changes in ‘’libel’’ for them.’’
d-in tied, kneed, allowed, stayed etc. ''For some Scots there's a distinction between ''tied and tide'', ''staid and stayed''. The diphthong changes in the past tenses. My spelling reform proposal system uses ''dd'' for past tenses for words that end in a vowel sound, but someone could add the letter that looks like a lowercase ''t'' and a lowercase ''d'' put together for those past tenses, like is shown in my extended alphabet ''which is different to eth.''
[C]-in ''human'', ''huge'', ''humor'', ''humongus'' etc. ''A voiceless ''y'' used by some people in words like ''human'', ''huge'', ''humor'', ''humongus'' etc. instead of ''hy'' [hj]. I'm using [C] from Sampa. Those words start with a different phoneme for them.
Unstressed [i]-in lenin, cabin, possible, bizarre, visit, wanted, needed, carpet, manage, private, amplifier, horrible. Some people make a distinction between ''lennon'' and ''lenin'' and also ''bazaar'' and ''bizarre''.''
Loch adds the letter ''ï'' to his extended alphabet for the unstressed [i] and makes a post about the letter. This is his post,
''Quote-''The letter ''ï'' is used in some words where some people use [..] and some people use the [i] sound in ''kit''. The ''i's'' that are pronounce [..] by most of us are pronounced like the ''i'' sound in ''kit'' by some ''except before ''l'' and ''r'' where the sound is always [..] for everyone. So, that ''lennon'' and ''lenin'' and ''bazaar'' and ''bizarre'' are distinguished. Also, for Americans and Britons [i] occurs in past tense ''ed'' endings and plural ''es'' endings and for some people in ''et'', ''age'' and ''ate'' endings. So, in unstressed syllables where either [..] or [i] can be used, the letter ''ï'' is used. ''America'' becomes ''Ømerïkø''. [i] is never used in ''en'' endings so, they become ''øn''.'' ''ï'' for some people would represent an unstressed [i] and for some people it would represent [..] and for some people it would represent both unstressed [i] and schwa.''
See - http://www.hi.is/~peturk/KENNSLA/87/VARS/WVMerger.html
Does your system include all these distinctions? If not, then why include the [ei] vs. [A] distinction and why include the [w] vs. [W] distinction?
Why write ''whiet'' instead of just ''wiet''?
|