Re: Interlect: YAIAL, a personal view

At 11:24 am +0000 23/4/02, Kala Tunu wrote:
>Raymond Brown <ray.brown@...> wrote:
> >>>
>If Carlos does have /h/, then there seems to me no reason not to have  /x/
>which could have [h] as an allophone.  IIRC both Mandarin Chinese and
>Spanish /x/ have this allophonic variant.
><<<
>This makes me wonder about [d] vs. [t], [k] vs. [g], and [b] vs. [p] in
>chinese? I was told that these pairs show contrastive(un)aspiration or
>ejection, not (un)voicing. is that true?
True - the difference is not between voiced and unvoiced.  All plosives are
unvoiced in Mandarin.  The difference is between unaspirated and aspirated.
The same is found BTW in Scots Gaelic (not sure about Irish) and, I
believe, in some southern German dialects.

>a pair od [r] and [l] would also be
It would be.  I've never been happy about having /r/ and /l/ as separate
phonemes in BrSc (for the 'name', see below) - that's one reason I'm
experimenting with the present 'syllabary' scheme.

>a problem i think.
>
[snip]

Sorry - obviously I misunderstood.
><<<
>I understand "hoaxlang" as "hoax auxiliary language".
Right - tho I'm still not quite certain exactly what you mean. Maybe you've
detected that the IAL aim of BrSc is not being pushed.

>By
>"articulation" and "execution" I referred to the articulation of the name
>"BrSc" which is not obvious to me.
Nor to me  :)

It's not actually the name of the language - it hasn't got one.  Dutton,
the inventor of Speedwords, used the term 'briefscript' as a common nouning
meaning an "alphabetic shorthand".  I used to refer my scheme as
"briefscript" in lieu of a proper name.  Then someone, I do not remember
who, coined 'BrSc' as an acronym for the language; I assumed it stood for
'Br(ief) Sc(ript)', but someone pointed out not so long ago that it could
also be an acronym for 'Br(own) Sc(ript)'.

Maybe, I should give the language a proper name that can be pronounced   :)

By "trend" I referred to the fact that
>you and Carlos wrote that Interlect and BrSc are conlangs made as if they
>could be IALs. I like artlangs designed as would-be IALs and I would love to
>learn how much yours and Carlos' differ by reading more on their respective
>webpages.
Understood   :)

The two languages will certainly be very different.  Carlos' has the
appearance (quite pleasing IMO) of a Romance-based pidgin; mine certainly
won't.   Compactness is one of the aims; while I will not (I think) be
going to the extremes of Lin - fascinating tho that language is) - it will
be not be like your 'average auxlang'.

When it's completed & named, I guess I ought to webify it  ;)

Ray.



======================
   XRICTOC ANECTH
======================