Re: "Proposed IPA" characters not in Unicode

Here be Unicode!

Paul Bennett skrev:
 > I have a chart of what I think is the latest IPA

Would you mind showing us that document? (I.e. link to it
-- if you have it on paper, can you scan it? If you lack
a webspace to put it you can email it to me and I'll
upload it.

 > (it includes the labiovelar flap (which is not yet in
 > CXS, and about which bloody battles have IIRC been
 > fought)). It contains a number of "proposed" characters,
 > some of which I'm familiar with and which are in Unicode
 > (such as the qp and db labiovelar stop symbols), and some
 > of which fall into the "easy to read, but apparently not
 > well- known" camp.

Does it by any chance include Chao's proposed letters for
alveopalatal sounds: ȡ ȴ ȵ ȶ \u0221 \u0234 \u0235
\u0236? My conlang Kijeb has a phonetic distinction
between plain palatals, including [J] and alveopalatals
including '[n\]'

(My idea for how to represent these in CXS is d\ l\ n\ t\
analogous to s\ z\, but unfortunately l\ is already in use
for ɺ the alveolar lateral flap. My preferred solution
would be to reassign l\ to the alveopalatal lateral and use
the hitherto unused 4\ for the lateral flap -- too bad L\ is
taken too! :-/)

 >
 > For example, there are "belted" versions of /l\/, /L/, and
 > /L\/, symbolizing lateral fricatives. Also, the long-leg
 > /r\/ is back (for the sound I might CXSify as /4_l/), and
 > brings with it a long-leg /r\/ with retroflex hook (the
 > retroflex equivalent, i.e. /4`_l/).

Something seems to be off with your CXS: the symbols you
have used map to unicode as follows:

l\ = ɺ = \u027a L = ʎ = \u028e L\ = ʟ = \u029f r\ = ɹ =
\u0279 4_l = ɾˡ = \u027e \u02e1 r\ = ɹ = \u0279 4`_l =
ɾ̢ˡ = \u027e \u0322 \u02e1

My guess is that by 4`_l you mean r`_l = ɽˡ = \u027d
\u02e1 (a lateral retroflex flap) for which the CXS l\` has
already been proposed by us Swedes. With my l\ > 4\ proposal
it would be 4\`.

It also seems that by "long-leg /r\/" you mean ɺ = \u027a,
but what, then, do you mean by l\? Or is "long-leg /r\/" a
typo for "long-leg /r/", i.e. the ɼ = \u027C once used for
Czech ř? I'm confused! :-)

 > I've currently been dealing with them by using the
 > COMBINING RETROFLEX HOOK and COMBINING PALATAL HOOK, but
 > that's obviously not such a hot prospect for the velar
 > lateral fricative.
 >
Do you mean: K` = ɬ̢ = \u026c \u0322, K_j = ɬʲ =
\u026c \u02b2 ?

I've used all of:
* s`_l = ʂˡ = \u0282 \u02e1
* s\_l = ɕˡ = \u0255 \u02e1
* z\_l = ʑˡ = \u0291 \u02e1
* C_l = çˡ = \u00e7 \u02e1
* x_l = xˡ = \u0078 \u02e1
which can hardly be misunderstood and is an easily
extendable pattern. I mean, what *would* a laterally
released freicative be if not a lateral fricative?

I've been using l\ = ɺ = \u027a with retroflex hook (i.e.
l\`/ too, which looks acceptable in DejaVu Serif, but r`_l
is clearly a better CXS.

 > So, my questions are:
 >
 > Should I just ignore them unless and until I need to
 > use them?

You mean if you should create a font for them?

 >
 > If not, how should I best represent them in typeset text?

I'd those workarounds we've mentioned (mainly _l = ˡ =
\u02e1 after the appropriate tap/flap/fricative character,
since it can hardly be misunderstood.

 >
 > Would it take official IPA homologation before the
 > characters make it into Unicode,

Probably.

 > or are they likely to slip in as part of one of the
 > Phonetic Extension blocks?

I'd expect them to end up in some new IPA Extensions A
block.
--


/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se

    a shprakh iz a dialekt mit an armey un flot

                                 (Max Weinreich)

Replies