Re: A break in the evils of English (or, Sturnan is beautiful)

--- In conlang@y..., Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@F...> wrote:

> The only thing I see is that you cannot find an example proving your point,
> while I can find at least one proving mine. Even with a 1-0 score I win! ;))
It's French against Ancient Greek, Irish, and common sense.  Your
score counting technique is selective indeed.  =P


>   This
> > is
> > because |ei| includes |i|, which symbolizes a high vowel.  To make |ei|
> > be
> > a *lower* vowel than |e| is very counterintuitive.
> >
>
> To you maybe, not to me.
To him and everyone else who isn't biased by the unfathomable
peculiarities of the French language.

Even you yourself mentioned that /ej/ in American English is beginning
to turn into /e/.  So an evolution of the digraph |ei| from /ej/ to
/e/ must be plausible even to you.


> >
> > Of course, by "nearly everyone" you mean "Frenchies."  For the rest of
> > the
> > world, I think you're wrong, for the reasons outlined above.
> >
>
> And I think you are wrong, because people don't use logic to guess the
> pronunciation of a spelling. I don't think *anyone* would ever naturally
> connect |ei| to [e]. To [ei], [ej], [Ej], [eI], [E] for those who would assume
> it's French, but never to [e].
I would naturally connect it to [e], among other things, but not [E].
That counterproves your theory.  =D


All in all, I would suggest we stop this discussion and agree to
disagree on this matter.  Our discussion has been about as productive
as discussing religion with the Taliban.  =P


-- Christian Thalmann

Reply