Re: Romanization of Reduced Vowels

At 22:17 9.12.1998 +0100, Kristian Jensen wrote:
>Mathias wrote:
[SNIP]
>>I also think that the Khmer script is a nightmare for pupils :
>>they spend two long years trying to master it whereas school is
>>expensive and an easier script perfectly possible. Please judge
>>from my description:
>
>-----<snip>-----
>
>It *IS* a nightmare: Over thirty basic consonants, some of which
>having the same consonant value but differing vowel value depending
>on the register. About twenty diacritics, each of which having two
>differing values depending on the register. But I'm sure learning
>Chinese or Japanese is a lot harder. The Khmer pupils should not
>complain when compared to what the Chinese or Japanese pupils would
>have to go through. Its part of the beauty in the script. Although I
>must admit, I have no immediate intentions to learn the script with
>this complexity. Perhaps later...
It seems the situation (and its historical background) is entirely parallel
to the stae of affairs in Tibetan, except that Tibetan has gone a number of
steps farther (i.e. all the way) in reduction of vowels. ;(  I really must
make a webpage demonstrating my phonemic Romanization of Tibetan.

>Regards,
>-Kristian- 8-)
/BP

    ----------------------------------------------------
    <bpj@...>

        Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant!
                                            (Tacitus)