Re: digraphs

Jeff Rollin wrote:
[snip]
>
> So again, sorry if my soapboxing ruffled feathers, that certainly wasn't the
> idea.
I assumed it wasn't, which is why I didn't reply immediately - I might
have ruffled other feathers. My over-sensitive feathers were a bit
ruffled - but apology readily accepted.
---------------------------------

Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
 > Hallo!
 >
 > On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 12:49:36 +0100, Jeff Rollin wrote:
[snip]
 >
 >>[...] You're also right that "if a conlang
 >>has a system of lenition similar to Gaelic", it makes sense to use
digraphs
 >>to represent /v/ and /f/.
 >
 >
 > Actually, the digraphs are only a jury-rig.  In the actual Irish uncial
 > script, no h-digraphs are used.

Yes, but I wrote _Gaelic_, not _Irish_. As far I know, the Scots version
is not ever written in Irish uncials. Also, I understand, the uncial
script is not much used now in Ireland, except for road signs and public
notices (I guess tourism is a factor here - it looks more attractive).
My understanding is that since the mid-20th cent Irish has been written
in the Roman alphabet and that lenited consonants have always been
shown, as they are in Scots Gaelic, by digraphs with _h_ and not with a
dot above the letter.

I completely fail to see why digraphs with -h are more 'jury rigged'
than using a dot (or any other diacritic) to show lenition. In any case,
the use of digraphs with -h to show lenited plosives has been common in
transcrptions of Biblical Hebrew. I suspect I could find other examples
also.

 >Instead, they use dots above the letters, which is far more elegant.

Anglophones generally don't find diacritics elegant  ;)

But whether diacritics or digraphs are preferable is very much in the
eye of the beholder, as the many threads on this subject on this list
prove.

Better, of course, are discrete symbols    :)


--
Ray
==================================
ray@carolandray.plus.com
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.
[WELSH PROVERB]

Reply