Re: ASCII IPA (Was Re: Zetowvu / Ezotwuv (new conlang))

On Tue, 25 Feb 2003 11:52:26 +0100, Eamon Graham <robertg@...>
wrote:

>In creating my system I began by listing what my _personal_ needs in
>an ASCII IPA are and worked from there.  Here's the thing: X-SAMPA,
>Kirshenbaum, and Carrasquer (a system I rather like) were all
>designed to fulfill different needs and expectations in an IPA ASCII
>transliteration.  Carrasquer, for example, wants to reserve the
>usage of digits (1, 2, etc.) to tones instead of using them for
>vowels as in SAMPA - and in working with my East Asian conlangs I've
>found that a great system to follow.
I also reserved digits (1-5) for tones in my ASCII-IPA, which was called
KPA (Kolagian Phonetic Alphabet).

http://www.io.com/~hmiller/lang/kpa.html

>So, if it can be demonstrated that we, as Conlangers, have different
>needs and expectations of an ASCII IPA system that can be better
>fulfilled by a new system (or an altering of an existing system)
>then an argument could be made for a Conlanger's IPA - for personal
>use or public use.
I think almost any of the systems that have been proposed on the list would
be better than X-SAMPA for our needs, especially the stress marks (which
obviously ought to be ['] and [,]) and the diacritics. (Quick, what's the
X-SAMPA for "retracted tongue root"?) The problem is familiarity.

--
languages of Azir------> ---<http://www.io.com/~hmiller/lang/index.html>---
hmiller (Herman Miller)   "If all Printers were determin'd not to print any
@io.com  email password: thing till they were sure it would offend no body,
\ "Subject: teamouse" /  there would be very little printed." -Ben Franklin