Re: tlhn'ks't, ngghlyam'ft, and other scary words
| From: | Jan van Steenbergen <ijzeren_jan@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, February 6, 2003, 20:21 |
|---|
--- BP Jonsson skrzypszy:
> >At 14:34 5.2.2003 +0000, Jan van Steenbergen wrote:
> >
> >>Similarly in Polish: _szczotka_ [StSOtka], _z'dzis£aw_ [z`dz`iswaf].
> >>(please don't pay to much attention to the X-SAMPA I wrote here)
> >
> >You got it stood on its head. It should be [s`ts`Otka] and [z\dz\imM\af],
> >I think.
>
> Sorry a typo there. Should be [z\dz\isM\af] of course!
Yes, you are right. So it wasn't for nothing that I wrote a warning, that my
X-SAMPA sux. AFAICT [s`ts`Otka] is correct. And [z\dz\...] too.
I object against [M\] for _£_ though. It is really a labiovelar approximant and
not just a velar one.
Which reminds me: I once had a Polish colleague here in the Netherlands whose
name was Z'dzis£aw. The director always called him: "Zzzzzz"
Jan
=====
"Originality is the art of concealing your source." - Franklin P. Jones
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
Reply