Re: YAEPT: Enuf is Enuf: Some Peepl Thru with Dificult Spelingz

Mark J. Reed wrote:
> On 7/12/06, Tristan Alexander McLeay <conlang@...> wrote:
>
>> > "Dir al,
>> > Frst uv al, thanks for luking intu may litl prowpowzl.  Ay didnt think
>> > it wud spark eniy intrist.  Frthr kaments bilo."
>> >
>> > Abviyusliy, this iz gird tord pri-GVS/kantinentl vawl valyuz rathr
>> > than krrint Inglish wunz, with thi gowl uv meyking speling mor lachikl
>> > for piypl muving bitwiyn Inglish and uthr langwichiz in aythr
>> > direkshn.
>>
>> Reading that looks like reading an American accent!
Yep. I found it incomprehensible on first reading. I mean things like
'krrint' & 'lachikl', for example, threw me completely!!

But when I read it with an (exaggerated) American accent, then things
started to fall into place.

I reminded me, I'm afraid, of the sort of thing I met when I first took
up teaching in Newport, in south Wales. The local accent there is quite
unlike the Welsh accent of the valleys, and quite like anything i had
met before (the accent of the the Splotlands in Cardiff is similar). I
occasionally got stuff submitted by kids that appeared incomprehensible;
but when I read it in the local accent, it generally made sense    :)
>
> Er.
See above!

>> (Maybe your goal, but)
>
> No, quite not.  Despite all the YAEPT's and even with what I've read
> of Wells and such, I seem to have failed to put the knowledge into
> practice here.
'fraid so.  ;)

================================
Tristan Alexander McLeay wrote:
 > On 13/07/06, Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...> wrote:
 >
 >> On 7/12/06, Tristan Alexander McLeay <conlang@...> wrote:
[snip]
 >> > [*]: It's not so much the fact that Americans don't distinguish the
 >> > qualities in "curry" and "furry" that doesn't cease to surprise me:
 >> > it's the fact that they don't distinguish the lengths. Are you sure
 >> > it's not something like [kr=i] vs [fr=ri]?
 >>
 >> I assume you're kidding, but trust me: there is absolutely no
 >> distinction.  It would never have occurred to me for any reason not to
 >> make those words a perfect rhyme.
 >
 > No, not really kidding. Just as surprised as you are that I make a
 > difference that you make none...

If you both perused the Conlang archives, you would cease to be
surprised. this has been discussed more than once. There was even a
thread "Is my curry furry?"    :)

In this neck of the anglophone world the _u_ in _curry_ is the same as
in _butt_ /kVri/; but the _ur_ in _furry_ is the same as in _fur_ which,
I guess, might make it phonemically /fr=ri/ which in our rhotic dialect
is realized as ['f3ri]

[snip]

 > Well, I tend to pronounce "data" as /da:t@/ ["da_":da_"], with the two
 > vowels differing only by length. "Darter" would be pronounced the
 > same.

Nah - 'darter' is [da?@] to people round this way   :)

FWI
data = Classical Latin ['data], Medieval Latin /data/ ['da:ta].

When I was a youngster in the 1950s the only English pronunciation I
heard was /de(i)t@/. But since then Latinate pronunciations have become
more common, with either /d&t@/ if influenced by Classical Latin, or
/da(:)t@/ if influenced by medieval or Church Latin  :)

Just to add to then fun, them thar Merkans of course pronounce the -t-
as a flap just like their intervocalic /d/, and in Britain the -t- is
more like to be [?]      ;)

Which IMHO all goes to show it's probably best to retain the Latin
spelling and let people do what they like with it.

What this thread seems to me to be clearly showing are the problems with
reforming English spelling on a phonemic basis with the wide ranging
variation that now exists in the global anglophone world.

--
Ray
==================================
ray@carolandray.plus.com
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"Ein Kopf, der auf seine eigene Kosten denkt,
wird immer Eingriffe in die Sprache thun."
"A mind that thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language".
J.G. Hamann, 1760