Re: mu for [N] (was: Koryak Vowel harmony)

On Friday, January 21, 2005, at 12:36 , Mark J. Reed wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 21, 2005 at 01:27:27PM +0200, Isaac Penzev wrote:
>> Saludos.
>>
>> I would not quote all the messages about µ. I just want to emphasize I
>> didn't advocate its usage for /N/. I used it EXCLUSIVELY AS A SIMULATION
>> of
>> eng caused by limitations of this Listserv and some ppl's mailers.
That was precisely the same reason given many years back for using |q| as
a simulation of eng caused by the limitations of 7-bit ASCII    :)

> Since when have intentions counted for anything?  Conlangs around the
> globe will now use |µ| for /N/, and we can all look back and blame you.
> :)
Yep - this time we know who it is   :)

I think |q| = /N/ has a pre-computer existence, going back to limitations
on typewriters and printers' fonts. Wasn't it used this way in the 19th
cent conlang called 'Ro'?

> Personally, I must say that even in environments where I have access to
> the full Unicode range, I don't like to use eng in a Latin transcription
> system; I find it aesthetically unappealing.
I cannot say I find it any more or less aesthetically appealing than other
characters in the modern Roman alphabet. It is, I believe, actually used
in the spelling of some natlangs.

Ray
=======================================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
ray.brown@freeuk.com
=======================================================
"If /ni/ can change into /A/, then practically anything
can change into anything"
          Yuen Ren Chao, 'Language and Symbolic Systems"

Reply