Re: Russian phonetics question [Was: What's SHCH?]

Tristan Mc Leay wrote:

> Stephen Mulraney wrote:
>> about this have been quite firm that it's actually [\s:] (or something
>...
>> counterpart, [\z:] or so. My question is not so much "is this true?"

> Hmm, what's [\s] and [\z]? Must we introduce entirely new ASCII-IPAs
> that don't even seem to have the remotest similarity with SAMPA?

Well, why not? I think this list has proved a fertile breeding ground of
systems that aren't quite X-SAMPA :).

Actually, I usually stick to X-SAMPA plus one or two additions (which
means may or may not be using the current version of CXS. I was nomail
for a period during which I think some changes were made... Where can I
see the current state of CXS, BTW?), but on this occassion, influenced
by my keymap for VIM, I managed to write the symbols backwards. I meant
[s\:] and [z\:], not [\s:] and [\z:] :). In anycase, this accidental
metathesis probably had the useful effect to forestalling any protests
of the kind "Russian has [s_d_j_k], not [s\:]!"


> [kor\s]
> would be very misleading indeed with yours.
Hmm, let's not spead the connection between this cock-up and my name too
far, now... I can just see it now: "Of course, I'm using Stephen
Mulraney's systems, which, I know, is hopelessly ambiguous and
completely unnecessary, but hey! I kind of like it! And flame him, not me."

--
Stephen Mulraney  ataltane@ataltane.net  http://ataltane.net
This post brought to you  by the letter 3 and the number 0xF

Reply