Re: French reform (Re: C.Thalmann, & #1)

!!! Unicode UTF-8 !!!

----- Original Message -----
From: "Elliott Lash" <erelion12@...>
To: <CONLANG@...>
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: French reform (Re: C.Thalmann, & #1)


> You're welcome :) I really did enjoy it. And I
> realized a mistake I made in standard French
> orthography, that perhaps rivals or beats the mistakes
> in your reform orthography. I wrote: écrité, I guess I
> got a little slap happy with my e-accent aigu. It's of
> course écrit, oops.
I though that was a little reform of the grammar. Such changes have already
occured in the past centuries. Two examples come to my mind:
- tistre (†) / tissu -> tisser / tissé
- résoudre / résolu -> solutionner / solutionné
==> écrire / écrit -> écriter / écrité

Back to my reform: I kept the "mute" final consonants because they are
required to make the feminine forms and the "liaisons". If we wrote ékri /
ékrit, the feminine would become as unpredictable in French as the plural
presently is in German: someone studying the language systematically needs
to look in a dictionary (or to ask a native) to find the right form.
For the same reason, I'd give up the tilde which I used for the nasal vowels
and use the traditionnal n instead: bon/bone.

And, although they are not pronounced in standard speech, I kept the final
e's which are still used in some "dialects" and in poetry:

Les sanglots longs
Des violons
De l'automne
Blessent mon coeur
D'une langueur
Monotone.

Tout suffocant
Et blême, quand
Sonne l'heure,
Je me souviens
Des jours anciens
Et je pleure;

Et je m'en vais
Au vent mauvais
Qui m'emporte
Deçà, delà,
Pareil à la
Feuille morte.

(Verlaine)


In CXS:

lE sA~glO lo~
dE viOlo~
d@ lotOn
blEs@ mo~ k9R
dyn@ lA~g9R
mOnOtOn

tu syfokA~
e blEm@ kA~
sOn@ l9R
Z@ m@ suvjE~
dE jurz A~sjE~
e Z@ pl9R

e Z@ mA~ vE
o vA~ movE
ki mA~pORt
d@sa d@la
paREj a la
f9j@ mORt

(vERlEn)


In my reformed ortografi:

Lèz sanglotz longz
Dès violonz
De l'otone
Blèset mon kœr
D'ùne langœr
Monotone.

Tut sufokant
Ét blème, kant
Sone l'œre,
Je me suvyenz
Dès jurz ansyenz
Ét je plœre;

Ét je m'an vèz
O vant movèz
Ki m'anporte
Desa, dela,
Parèy à la
Fœye morte.

(Vèrlène)


But I'll still add the following comment: ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)

JF


>
>
> --- # 1 <salut_vous_autre@...> wrote:
>> Elliott Lash wrote:
>>
>> > > >Il y est assis -> Il i èt asiz
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > I don't think I'd even say that sentence I'd
>> > > probably say "Il est assis là"
>> > >
>> > > ietasilâ /jetasilA/
>> >
>> >Both sound good to me (but it's my second
>> language...I
>> >studied it for 7 years):
>> >
>> >   1)   iliètasi
>> >   2)   ilètasilâ
>> >
>>
>> Yes, Both are good I simply said that /iljEtasi/
>> sounds unnatural in my
>> dialect but I'd understand like everybody else'd do
>>
>> > > >Il est mangé -> Il èt mãjé
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > jemãje /jema~Ze/
>> >
>> >I'd say: ilèmãje
>> >  (I think that you meant to write: iemãje)
>> >
>>
>> Yes, sorry, when X-Sampa's phonetic becomes as
>> natural to write as my normal
>> writing, I don't always think of "i" when it will
>> sound /j/
>>
>> > > >Parlez français -> Parléz frãsèz
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > parle frãsè /parle fRa~sE/
>> >
>> >I'd say what you say, basically, although I'd have
>> /R/
>> >in /parle/ too.
>> >
>>
>> Yes.. Let's say it's the opposite of my last
>> mistake: my method overtook
>> X-Sampa here..
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > > lë paraplyi ie vèr /l@ paRaplHi je vER/
>> >
>> >Hm, same except I'd probably have /E/ for your /ie/
>> >Also, if I were doing this I might stick the
>> article
>> >on as a prefix, like in Creol. So it'd be:
>> lëparaplyi
>> >
>>
>> Yes I should, to keep it really polysynthetic
>>
>> > > >Monsieur Staline est-il Russe? -> MÅ"siÅ"
>> Staline
>> > > èt il Rùse?
>> >
>> > > mösiö Stalin ie-ty rus? /m2sj2 stalin je ty Rys/
>> >
>> >Hm, same except for è-ti /Eti/ for your ie-ty.
>> Also,
>> >how come you write /y/ both _y_ and _u_ in this
>> >example. I'd think it would be _y_ in both cases.
>> >
>>
>> Sure, What a varition in mistakes I made! Now
>> neither my method nor X-Sampa
>> overtook but now it's my natural writing that passed
>> in front..
>>
>> [...]
>> >  ~ Elliott.
>>
>> Thanks for these observations
>>
>> - Max
>>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Make Yahoo! your home page
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
>

Replies