Philip Newton wrote:
[snip]
>> we could use _f_ for phi, and _x_ for khi. But what do we do about
>> _theta_ - obviously using the Greek symbol defeats the object using
>> Roman script for those who cannot read the Greek characters! Would þ
>> (thorn) present similar problems?
>
>
> I would imagine not. At least, unless people are trapped in a
> restrictive ASCII-only world, in which case they wouldn't even see
> accented vowels.
I know - I recall the bad old days when I joined the list (How many
years ago?), and if we wanted everyone to read mails properly we had
write the darn accents after the vowel, so _fe^te_ instead of _fête_.
But it seems (practically) everyone can read accented vowels nowadays
(tho ŵ [w with circumflex] probably still causes problems to some).
BTW before any pedant is tempted to tell me that _w_ ain't a vowel, it
*is* a vowel in Welsh orthography, and circumflexed w is not uncommon,
e.g. cŵn "dogs" :)
> Although, come to think of it, I thought I had read that some people
> had difficulty reading Old English on some systems. I think this was
> because the Mac Roman charset lacks edh. ... apparently, it has no
> thorn, either.
I've used Macs for years and don't recall problems with thorn (can't
remember about edh).
> However, I'm not sure whether this is still a problem with Mac OS X,
Certainly not!
[snip]
>> Could I use _8_ because of its resemblance to the Greek theta?
>
> That's one convention in Greeklish. It does, of course, have the
> disadvantage that it's caseless.
Nor shall I - I'm sticking with _th_ at the moment.
>> But what about eta (= /e/ in EAK, as opposed to epsilon = /E/) and omega
>> (= /o/ in EAK, as opposed to omicron = /0/)?
[snip]
>
> I'd recommend ê and ô (e-circumflex and o-circumflex), respectively.
> Both have some currency as Latin equivalents of eta and omicron,
They do - but I find it a bit confusing as ancient & Koine Greek had a
circumflex accent.
> and
> since you only have one written accent, you don't need Latin
> circumflex to represent Greek circumflex (perispômenê).
Yes - BUT how does one put an acute on a circumflexed-e or
circumflexed-o? Really we need a system that allows an acute to be put
on the symbol.
> Also, ô is familiar from French for /o/, and I wouldn't be surprised
> if there were a language using ê to represent /e/ as distinct from
> /E/.
It's called Portuguese ;)
I could use the following system:
UNSTRESSED STRESSED
HIGH è ê
LOW e é
> _eh_ and _oh_ seem strange -- especially the first, since I
> interpret _eh_ as /E/.
Not to anglophones where _eh!_ is pronounced to rhyme with _say!_ :)
>> [PERSONAL PRONOUNS - 1st & 2nd]
>> I am a little surprised to have had no comments on these from either of
>> the two Philips, so I assume my use of -λαό (-laó) "people" to form the
>> plurals is not as outrageous I feared it might seem :)
>
> I *was* rather taken aback by the suggestion, but decided it wasn't
> too outrageous after all.
Good :)
[snip]
>
>> I propose that EAK do the same, e.g.
>> to auto gunaiko _or_ to gunaiko to auto = the same woman
>> BUT
>> auto to gunaiko _or_ to gunaiko auto = the woman herself
>
> Ah! This will take some getting used to, as the second usage means
> "this woman" in modern Greek. (And both forms are possible, i.e. with
> pronoun before or after the article+noun complex.)
Presumably, however, you (and modern Greeks) will have exactly the same
problem if you read ancient Greek. As EAK is strictly based on the
ancient language with a cut off in the Koine of the 1st cent CE, the
modern Greek usage is not relevant.
> ("The same woman" uses "idios": "hê idia gunaika" / "i idia yineka",
> as does "the woman herself": "hê idia hê gunaika" / "i idia i
> yineka".)
In the old language _ídios_ meant "private, personal, peculiar" - it
won't do for either "the same" or "himself/ herself" etc in EAK.
I think your & my observations here show up one the reasons that the
"Graeca sine flexione" of February 2006 got nowhere in the end:
combining ancient & modern Greek in a mishmash is simply going to throw
up inconsistencies and ambiguities. This, I think, is why the approaches
you & I are taking are my likely to succeed.
[snip]
>> PS - how do the two Philips (and other Hellenists) re-act to the
>> Romanized spellings in the examples. It's not too Glosa like, is it? :)
>
> I don't know Glosa.
See: http://www.glosa.org/
> It looks fine to me, on the whole -- rather natural. The "worst" is
> |u| for upsilon, but even that shouldn't take too much getting used
> to.
Especially if one is French :)
> Though you should realise that I'll persist in reading EAK with modern
> Greek phonology :) For example, _auto_ = /af'to/.
...which is why EAK will never catch on with Greeks ;)
--
Ray
==================================
ray@carolandray.plus.com
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.
[WELSH PROVERB]