Re: CPA - An ASCII-based phonetic alphabet

At 9:44 PM +0000 11/16/01, Lars Henrik Mathiesen wrote:
>  > Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 11:15:41 -0500
>>  From: Steve Kramer <scooter@...>
>>
>>  With all of the various ideas being offered for ASCII-IPAs, is there
>>  a feeling among the list that X-SAMPA is inadequate for our needs
>>  here?
>
>As far as I can tell, noone finds X-SAMPA inadequate. Non-mnemonic,
>over-complicated, and ugly, perhaps, but not inadequate.
Exactly. It doesn't "lay under the fingers" as well as I'd like.

>[snip]
>Let me explain my feelings with an analogy:
>
>SAMPA and X-SAMPA are like English.
>
>Kirschenbaum ASCII-IPA is like Esperanto.
>
>The newer schemes are like Ido, Novial, Latine sine flexione,
>Interlingua, Interlingua, Interlingue, and so on.
>
>Note: This list uses English almost exclusively. So does AUXLANG, for
>that matter.
This is a nice analogy. However, I seem to remember that Kirschenbaum
used to have the unofficial status of a standard on this list. Am I
remembering wrong? If I am correct, why did we change?

Dirk
--
Dirk Elzinga                              Dirk_Elzinga@byu.edu

"Speech is human, silence is divine, yet also brutish and dead;
therefore we must learn both arts."            - Thomas Carlyle

Replies