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

On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Y.Penzev wrote:

> Re: Lars Henrik Mathiesen on Monday, December 03, 2001 5:06 PM
>
> > The possible alternative to (X-)SAMPA as a list standard seems to be
> > to choose one of various new schemes proposed by people on the list,
> > each of them best liked by the inventor.
>
> Well, i'm pretty new here, and unwilling to change the rules of the game :-)
> But is it polite to use (NOT as standard) e.g. SAMPA with some minor
> modifications?
It depends on who you ask. It seems to me that Lars and Muke (among
others) would much rather you stuck to the standard, others don't care.
Whether or not I care is uncertain. If you wanted to please me, though,
you couldn't go wrong with using the unmodified standard, that's what I
use (I mostly use unmodified X-Sampa, otherwise I can't write a vowel in
my dialect of English (/3\:/. I guess I could leave it as /3:/ if I had
to, but everyone* knows that the English /3:/ sounds different to the
Aussie one.)

*Everyone in the sense of, of course, every Aussie who uses /3\:/.

Tristan

anstouh@yahoo.com.au

War doesn't prove who's right, just who's left.
                       - BSD Games' Fortune