Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: USAGE: Adapting non-Latin scripts

From:<veritosproject@...>
Date:Thursday, May 25, 2006, 1:07
Part of the problem is we are inundated with our current spelling.  I
was pointing out to a non-conlanger that "ch" was not a single
sound,as many believe, but two, before I got around to showing [tS], I
got told: "of course!  the c then the h!  two sounds." lol...

On 5/24/06, Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...> wrote:
> --- Tristan Alexander McLeay <conlang@...> > wrote: > > > > > I'm not really sure that's a *problem* though. It's > > certainly not why > > the English orthography is a bit difficult to work > > with. As long as > > the rules were regular with how to spell sounds, it > > doesn't matter if > > we spelt /æ/ as "a", "ä", "æ" or "ae" and /ei/ as > > "ai", "aa" or "é". > > There are times when I think that English lies > somewhere on a continuum between phonetic spelling and > abstract pictographic. It's not as precise as IPA, yet > not *quite* as arbitrary as spelling "house" as "QTPN" > and "mouse" as "BHDK". > > English spelling, while not quite that extreme, > certainly blurs the line that supposedly connects > symbols to sounds while enhancing the line that > connects symbols directly to meanings, regardless of > sounds. > > But instead of complaining, I suppose we should thank > our lucky stars we don't have even more exceptions to > the rules. We could, for example, use "gh" as the long > vowel marker and end up spelling "light" (which > already observes this rule) and "hoghl" (for "hole" > which does not yet follow this rughl.) > > --gary >

Reply

Michael Adams <abrigon@...>