Re: ML4 (was Re: TECH: Testing again etc.)

!!!Stephen, your mailer demands replies to you personally, not to the List.
Change the settings, please!!!

***********************************
Stephen Mulraney scripsit:

> Isaac Penzev wrote:
>
>  > A pretty thing. Just a couple of comments: why do you use such a
>  > counterintuitive orthography? _ò_ for a [2] and _ą_ for a [O] seem rather
>  > arbitrary.
>
> Thanks for your remarks. I was afraid someone would pick up on the
> orthography :). It's not finalised yet, and while it's not deliberately
> perverse, I do want it to have a 'flavour', and to record (where it's
> not terribly ambiguous) the evolution of the language. So for example,
> [w] is *sometimes* represented by _f_, where it has derived from
> Tetelgen _fu_, which was [\p].
Ah, that makes sense...

[skipping futher explanations]

> (BTW, is _å_ in Scandinavian langs actually [O]?
I hope so. But any of our Scandinavian colleagues may explain it better.

> I *am* thinking about using _ü_ and _ö_ at least for the first two of
> these vowel (with the vowel harmony, it would look rather Turkish!),
> so the issue isn't settled yet.
Yeah, _ü_ and _ö_ are charming!

>  > And I would recommend to substitute t-comma-below with t-cedilla _ţ_,
>  > because t-comma-below has a bit dubious status (nobody knows for sure if
>  > they are the same or not).
>
> Very good point, thanks. Cedillas not being available on all the
> consonants I might like them on, I was using comma-below as a quick fix,
> but noticed that some applications mangle them with higher frequency
> than other bits of unicode.
John Cowan may enlighten us Re this matter, but I'm afraid t-with-comma-below is
not treated well in the present state of Unicoded applications...

> they've been composed with. The undercommas, not being precomposed, look
> ugly, like in _cząd̦liëhązio_. (Though the fact that it's adjacent to
> an ogonek doesn't help.)
Why? I use Arial Unicode MS (here at the office), and the word looks perfect!

> _gäţeczr_
> (or _mniţò_):
> like _hròlţòw_
Looks much better with t-with-cedilla

> By the way, here's my current notes (fairly self-explanatory) on the
> vowel orthography. FV, MV and BV refer to the environment (front, mid or
> back) that a vowel is accommodating to in vowel harmony.
> Look and tremble, ye mighty :)
[skips the charts]

Arghhh! Phonology is not my strongest point, so I leave comments for the
others... Anyway, I looks great and reasonable. And, moreover, pretty readable
in the mail. I so no boxes at all this time!

> Stephen Mulraney
With respects,
-- Yitzik


-- Yitzik

Replies