Re: CPA - An ASCII-based phonetic alphabet
|From:||Christian Thalmann <cinga@...>|
|Date:||Friday, November 16, 2001, 22:49|
--- In conlang@y..., Dirk Elzinga <Dirk_Elzinga@B...> wrote:
> At 9:44 PM +0000 11/16/01, Lars Henrik Mathiesen wrote:
> >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.
That's an understatement... it's always a pity when flawed systems get
declared standard just because they were first. See imperial units, or
the definition of the Euler Gamma function... ;-)
As an amateur who hasn't used X-SAMPA for long, I would have no scruples
to switch to CPA. However, most of the pros and veterans on this list
are obviously quite attached to X-SAMPA, and I can see the sense in
keeping up an established standard. I guess it's time for me to learn
-- Christian Thalmann