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? -> Mœsiœ 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