Re: Revised X-Sampa revision (was [several other things])

Trebor Jung wrote:
> Merhaba!
>
> I felt that my first proposal needed some changes and additions. Here is the
> new version:
>
First of all, I want to say that this is an admirable job. I can barely
read X-SAMPA as it is, and I can't imagine how bad it would be with a
screen reader. :)

I hope you don't mind a few questions and some (hopefully) constructive
criticism.

(I snipped the parts I'm not commenting on)

> Consonants
>
> voiceless, voiced
[snip]

> Nasals
> bilabial
> b~
> labiodental
> F~
> alveolar
> z~
> retroflex
> z.~
> palatal
> c~
> velar
> g~
> uvular
> Q~
I like the use of "~" for nasals, and I understand from your reply to BP
why you chose it. One question: can I, for example, use "s~" for a
voiceless alveolar nasal ([n_0] in CXS)?

> Trills
>
> bilabial
> b*
> alveolar
> z*
> uvular
> Q*
>
> Taps/Flaps
>
> alveolar tap
> z;
> retroflex flap
> z.;
Very nice, much better than [4], etc.

> Fricatives
>
> bilabial
> p", b"
> labiodental
> f, F
This is the only problem I can see. You used "F~" for a labiodental
nasal, which would lead one to assume that "F" was a plosive. I know
there isn't an IPA symbol for a labiodental plosive, but this does break
the regularity. Is there a problem with "v" for the voiced labiodental
fricative, and perhaps "F, V" for the plosives? This would change the
nasal to "V~" and the approximant to "V`" though...

[more snipping]
> aspirated: -'
> palatalized: -c`
> labialized: -b`
> glottalized: -?
> implosive: -\
> breathy voiced: ^
> creaky voice: %
These are all written like s', sc`, s%, I assume?

> apical: _p
> linguolabial: _b
> laminal: _l
> nasal release: _n
> velarized: _k
> lateral release: _l
> pharyngealized: _m
> no audible release: _s
> syllabic: =
These seem similar enough to X-SAMPA.

> advanced tongue root: >
> retracted tongue root: _<
It's probably just me, but this feels backwards. It must be all those
diagrams of people facing to the right. Yeah, it's just me, I could get
used to it. :)

> syllabifier: . (e.g. the 'ng' in 'finger' is /z~.g/)
>
> Vowels
>
> unrounded, rounded
>
[even more snipping]
> Open
>
> front
> u1, u2
> back
> u3, u4
>
> Between open-mid and open
>
> front unrounded
> U2
> central unrounded
> U4
>
I don't understand these. Just wondering, why not "a", since you used
"i" and "e" earlier, and it seems more "open" than "u", like in "say ahh!"?

> Open-mid
>
> front
> o1, o2
> central
> o3, o4
> back
> o5, o6
>
> long: :
> semi-long: ;
>
> Vowels having primary stress are followed by '. Vowels having secondary
> stress are followed by `.
Nice.

>
> --Trebor
>
All in all, I would have to say that your system (and it is a new
system, not just a revision of X-SAMPA) is very good. It might look
unintuitive, but it has a regularity that the major schemes lack. Did
you try to optimize your system for screen reading software? Because it
does seem better than X-SAMPA.

--
Michael