Re: IPA Transliteration (was Re: satya:graha)

>From: J Y S Czhang <czhang23@...>
>Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:37:49 EST
>
>In a message dated 03.12.2001 03:01:19 PM, and_yo@HOTMAIL.COM writes:
>
> >While the best liked by the inventor remark likely applies to (X-)SAMPA
> >too, I just like to add to personally I find say Jörg's CPA generally
>more
> >intuitive and eye-friendly than X-SAMPA.
>
>     ::nods in whole-hearted agreement:: I really like CPA a lot. I think a
>couple more months of CPA use & I will have it down pat. X-SAMPA is more
>intimidatingly confusing in comparison.
>
> >PS Apart from it's other failings, X-SAMPA also boasts one of the
> >unwieldiest names of ASCII-IPA schemes. Couldn't we collapse it to "XPA"
> >or something?
>
>     ROTFLMAOSHIH
>
>     czHANg who admits he has a pathological disliking for X-SAMPA (but is
>proud of bein' adaptable... will use Xcreta-SAMPA if _needs be_...)
I too DESPISE X-Sampa.  I think I've used it in all of about 2 posts in the
whole time I've been on conlang (since back in the diku days).  I was
attempting to learn Kirshenbaum back when it was used a bit on-list, but as
it fell into disfavor, I gave up on the whole webified IPA thing.  I'm NOT
going to learn anything a ugly as X-Sampa.  I usually just skim or ignore
posts that have too much X-sampa in them.  I'll go to great (and I'm sure to
many, annoying) lengths to avoid polluting my posts with Xcerta-Sampa.

Adam

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp