Re: Additional diacritics (was: Phonological equivalent of...)
| From: | Henrik Theiling <theiling@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Sunday, February 11, 2007, 17:50 |
|---|
Hi!
John Vertical writes:
> Count me among the [P]-for-the-bilab-fric proponents too, as well as
> the can-read-but-not-send-IPA crowd. And now, some comments:
>
> (Benct:)
> >and while we're at fool-proofing, why not introduce a\ for
> >æ and 9\ for Œ, to remove the main source of confusion
> >between CXS and X-SAMPA?
>
> I use [a\] for the lo _central_ vowel (when plain [a] is not
> sufficient), as per Z-SAMPA. [9\] for Πis fine for me, but how
> commonly does anyone actually NEED it?
I use [a"] for the low central vowel (e.g. for German), which is
conventional X-Sampa. I cannot the the char \214 here, though, so I
don't know what 9\ is meant to be. Probably something from a Windows
charset not supported on this terminal. :-P
Never mind.
**Henrik
Reply