Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

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)