|From:||Andreas Johansson <and_yo@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, February 27, 2003, 13:19|
Christophe Grandsire wrote:
>En réponse à Andreas Johansson <and_yo@...>:
> > I'm obviously missing something here. Do you mean that the C-IPA
> > diacritics
> > causes to symbols to move between different positions on the IPA chart
> > rather than between different actual PoAs?
> The choice of diacritics that look like IPA diacritics is for mnemonics
>only (as I'm explaining for the third time now).
> > I disagree about X-SAMPA [s_d] not being a true voiceless dental
> > fricative.
> > I mean, it's voiceless, dental and fricative! Indeed, I can produce [T]
> > and
> > [s_d] at the same PoA - don't ask me what the essential articulatory
> > difference is*, but it's not PoA.
> > * I guess it has something to do with the difference between sibilant
> > and
> > non-sibilant fricatives, but I don't know what that difference is. I'm
> > getting out of my depth here, I'm afraid.
>I personally find [T] pretty sibilant, so I don't know what the difference
What _is_ a sibilant anyway? It seems that [T D] are not normally classed as
> > IPA, however, has no symbol for it. ( Up-side-down "a" being on the
> > same
> > height as ash.)
>*That's* @} (since the schwa is a bit lower than open-mid vowels). You
>that C-IPA's purpose is to transliterate the IPA and only the IPA, and not
>to "correct" its "mistakes". Thus it doesn't provide simple ways to mark
>characters that don't exist in the IPA.
You seem to've snipped part of what you're replying to, but [@}] for IPA
turned a seems sensible. Was [a-] being [A]?
> > Well, then "+" obviously does not merely shift the PoA forward (since
> > it's
> > able to change the "sibilancy", or whatever). Moving on the IPA chart
> > works,
> > of course.
>Since the IPA chart is organised in terms of PoA (labial, labiodental,
>etc...) and MoA (stop, fricative, trill, etc...), that's how I described
>said exactly that I was talking about moving in the chart in my mail.
I obviously missed the part about specifically refering to the IPA chart.
> > But I don't understand what two systems I'm supposedly mixing?
>The actual IPA diacritics (consistently rendered with a ^ followed by
>character in C-IPA) with the C-IPA diacritics which move characters on the
I've spoken about IPA diacritics in this thread? What did I say?
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.