Re: Phonological Relay Proposal

Yoon Ha Lee wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Robert Hailman wrote:
>
> > Nik 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.
>
> Hmm.  What if your language has pitch-stress and it's completely
> predictable?  Eh, I can indicate it anyway.  But I notice that Korean is
> pitch-accented, but Americans rendering Korean tend to ignore those rules
> and are understood anyway.  Sort of like putting the emPHAsis on the
> wrong sylLAble.  (I think Alex Winbow gave me that example.)
Indicate it, but make it clear that you are with an explanation. Some
languages might use it, others will ignore it. Ajuk alWAYS puts the
emphaSIS on the last syllaBLE, for examPLE.

--
Robert