Re: Optimum number of symbols

"Mike S." wrote:
> It's inaccurate to say that English "h" is "not a very productive"
> phonetic marker;  it is not a phonetic marker at all.
I admit I phrased it poorly.  What I meant was that it's not completely
arbitrary.  It's used as an (unpredictable) marker of similar sounds.
You can't predict that {th} will be /T/, but you can be pretty sure it
won't be /x/.  You're right about its usage in English not being a true
phonetic marker.  Altho, historically, at least, h-digraphs had just
three significances in English: fricative (th, ph, gh - which originally
indicated /x/) or alveopalatal (sh, ch) or voicelessness (wh).  Phonetic
changes, of course, have ruined the significance of gh and wh.

In some languages, of course, it's more reliable.  Latin used it to
indicate aspiration in Greek borrowings, while Irish Gaelic uses it to
indicate a set of phonetic changes.

--
"There's no such thing as 'cool'.  Everyone's just a big dork or nerd,
you just have to find people who are dorky the same way you are." -
overheard
ICQ: 18656696
AIM Screen-Name: NikTaylor42