Re: Phonological Relay Proposal

Kristian Jensen wrote:
>
> Robert Hailman wrote:
> >> Marcus Smith wrote:
> >> > Does that mean everyone will have to include stress/pitch/tone in their
> >> > transcriptions?
> >>
> >> I would think so anyways.  After all, some languages have various
> >> neutralizations that depend on stress, like reducing vowels to schwa, or
> >> other phonetic restrictions based on stress.  E.g., in W, a cluster like
> >> ['i.a] would become [i], while [i.a] or [i'a] would become [ja].
> >>
> >
> >My opinion is that we should all include stress at the least. If you
> >include pitch & tone, i.e. their essential to your language, explain how
> >it's transcribed, in both your orthography and in the ASCII-fication of
> >the IPA you use.
>
> Stress and other prosodical phenomenon would be important. In order to make
> all things equal, participants should not have to pay particular attention
> to word boundary. It'd be interesting to see how the prosody of one language
> would be interpreted in another language. Afterall, what one language considers
> one word, might sound like several words in another (or vice versa).

I'd like it if word boundaries could be marked in the transcription,
just to make it easier to read, but if two words consistently run
together, that should be marked. In the one submission I've recieved to
date, elisions were marked by /_/, slight breaks (commas) as /,/, and
full stops marked /./. That seems to be a good system, but it should be
made clear whether you use it or not in your transcription once the
relay begins.

Participants don't have to pay attention to them, if they feel the
speakers of their Conlang would run them together or break up a word,
but I'd appreciate it if the boundaries were marked.

> Great idea, BTW!
Thanks.

--
Robert