Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

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

From:Michael Potter <mhpotter@...>
Date:Tuesday, February 24, 2004, 22:17
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