Re: USAGE: Adapting non-Latin scripts

But other than for dictionaries and like, the IPA does not seem
to be workable for any language, atleast for writing and like?
Taking notes and things long hand, with a cursive form I suspect
becomming quite confusion and run together, with several like
letters becomming indestinguishible.

Yes, the SH sound, and how it is spelled, changing it would be a
major change.. Leaving the French spelling behind and spell them
closer to how they are spoken would be a major plus.

But major thing still is, is the Latin Characters all that good
for any language? IPA yes seems to be alot better adaptation of
the Latin Alphabet for a wider ranger of languages, but how do
you do cursive in it?

English an easy language to learn, but hard to learn how to
spell it?

Mike



----- Original Message -----
From: "Shreyas Sampat" <ssampat@...>
To: <CONLANG@...>
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 8:05 AM
Subject: Re: Adapting non-Latin scripts


> Michael Adams wrote:
>
> >Is the Latin characters really that good for English? As well
as are they good for your conlang, or is there a form of
"graphics" that could do your language better?
> >
> >
> Uh.
>
> You have to provide design goals to ask a question like that.
>
> Like, "Is the Latin alphabet really that good for [narrowly
phonetically
> describing one dialect of] English?" No, it's not really.
That's what
> IPA is for.
>
> "Is the Latin alphabet really that good for [providing
representations
> of words that have some relation to their pronunciation,
disambiguating
> homophones, and providing hints towards etymology (and thus
affix
> compatibility) while working in a limited character set with
words of]
> English?" Yes, it's pretty good for that.
>
> --
> Shreyas

Reply