Re: USAGE: Shaw alphabet (was Re: USAGE: Con-graphies)
From: | Benct Philip Jonsson <bpjonsson@...> |
Date: | Tuesday, June 13, 2006, 12:17 |
Tristan Alexander McLeay skrev:
> IPA [ɶ] = CXS [&\] = X-SAMPA [&] is the rounded form of [a], the open
> front rounded vowel. It is quite rare in the world's languages & in
> conlangs, so some people (like Peter) are content to simply switch &
> and {, but I still think using brackets as letters is obtuse, and so
> when I used the phoneme in Føtisk, I used [&\], which makes good sense
> IMHO (I also dislike being gratuitously incompatible). I've never seen
> this vowel used for a low central rounded vowel; I'd probably expect
> [Q] to be used instead (then, I can't say I've ever looked!). CXS and
> X-SAMPA (obviously) differ here.
It is often claimed that many Swedish dialects have an [&\]
phoneme, but at least I rather have a low central rounded vowel
in the relevant words, and I usually use [3\] (= IPA [ɵ])
for it, even though I also consider [a] to actually be
low central unrounded, which probably would make [&\]
central too. It is a bit of a practical consideration
here, since both [Q] and often [&] = [æ] occur as well in
these dialects, but [3] doesn't, so [&], [3\] [Q] give
a maximally distinctive transcription in CXS. In IPA
I'm out of luck in terms of visual distinction, since
all of ø, ɵ, ʚ occur... (FWIW I can't distinguish
[3] and [3\] in hearing, and I normally use [3\] for
English /V/ and /@/. In NURSE words I use [3\r\`]
or something that is probably [3\r\] though I'm tempted
to use [r\`_o] for this /r/ allophone of mine.
NB the 'retroflexes' in my Swedish speech are sublamino-
alveolar rather than cacuminal, of course!)
> There's obviously also IPA [ʉ] = CXS [u\] = X-SAMPA [}]. I actually
> sometimes use [0] (zero) for this, because that's the TIPA (IPA
> package for TeX) way of entering the vowel, and also because when
> Scroll Lock's on, the character that normally enters 0 on my kebyoard
> enters ʉ, but I'd consider this wrong for CXS purposes, given that CXS
> has also changed [1]->[i\].
Well since [1] (one) became [i\] in order not to confuse it
with [l] (lowercase L) ot makes no sense to introduce the
risk of confusing zero and uppercase oh. Having both _0
and _O (guess which is which! :-) is bothering enough,
so that I would be tempted to use a CXS like [a_h] for
voiceless vowels -- IME Icelandic preaspiration is
realized as devoicing of the last milliseconds of the
vowel.
--
/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
a shprakh iz a dialekt mit an armey un flot
(Max Weinreich)