Re: Breehah horp
|From:||Jim Henry <jimhenry1973@...>|
|Date:||Friday, March 2, 2007, 23:52|
On 3/2/07, Dave Rutan <rutan3@...> wrote:
> >> One thing to remember is
> >> that since English dialects differ so much, it can be kind of
> >> ambiguous or confusing to give pronunciations based on English words.
> >> E.g. you say <ui> is like in <suit>, which for me is /u/, an 'oo'
> Would 'fruit' be a better choice?
What might be better is to give a table with the Latin letter in one
column, the IPA value of each letter in one column, and an approximate
English equivalent in another column; and also make it clear what
English dialect you are basing the English approximations on.
And I suppose a conhistorical explanation of the Latin orthography
with English letter-values could be that it was devised by missionaries
familiar only with English and Breehah, and no linguistic training
-- no knowledge of IPA, for instance. I would expect such an orthography
might fail to represent some of the significant phonemic
distinctions in Breehah.