Re: C-IPA underlying principles and methods

Christophe Grandsire wrote:

>>The s-oid sounds being what they are, things seems to be going a little
>>to
>>easy here. How to indicate X-SAMPA [s_d] as opposed to [T], for
>>instance?
>>I'm having an idea on the later down, so read on ...
>
> I think you misunderstood the system here. As I said, the simple diacritics are
> peculiar to C-IPA itself and are P/MoA movers, not IPA diacritics!
I think I understand, but it would seem to me that it would be  better
to describe it in terms of the IPA i.e. the simple diacritics of C-IPA
move the sound to another box|dot on the IPA consonant|vowel charts.
Because otherwise it would seem like [s+] should maintain it's
sibilantness and become a dental sibilant fricative, which sounds
different from a dental non-sibilant fricative, and vice-versa for [T-]
(taking [T] to represent IPA theta).

> Well, there's one, but I think I prefer writing it as @} (lowered schwa).
Really? I would've thought [a-] be a low central unrounded vowel (no
IPA, but would be useful in discussing English: RP [a] != Aussie [a-] !=
GA [a--]) and [@}] would be C(onlang)X(-)S(ampa) [6], upside-down a. Of
course, I'm almost certainly confusing the two kinds of diacritics in
C-IPA here.

Tristan.

Reply