|
|
|
| 1055 |
From: Robert McBroom <info@o...>
Date: Sat Jun 2, 2001 3:45am
Subject: /SFvWn: kMx fP disleksW ?
|
| |
|
/SFvWn: kMx fP disleksW
?
Excerpted from an article in the US edition of TIME MAGAZINE,
March 26, 2001:
In the past couple of decades, scientists have learned a great
deal about the neurological causes of dyslexia. But what they hadn't
yet explained is why its incidence varies so from country to country
- and what that difference means. Last week, Italian French and
British researchers proposed an answer. The variability, they wrote
in Science, depends greatly on the complexity of writing
systems.....
The findings mesh perfectly with what we already know about how
the brain reads, says Dr, Bennett Shaywitz who co-directs the Center
for the Study of Learning and Attenttion at Yale Unicersity. The
brain, he explains, does not have an innate reading ability -
as it does for speech - so it deals with the written word by
converting it into the nuts an bolts of famliar phobetic language.
According to prevailing theory, the reading centers of the brain
break words down into sound units known as phonemes and recognize
them as the elements of a phonetic code. Then the centers assemble
that code to derive meaning fron the symbols on the page. Most of us
learn to do this seamlessly by the time we're seven years old.
In their study, the scientists compared the reading ability of
dyslexics from Britain, France and Italy and found that Italian
dyslexics read far better than their French and English counterparts.
... : The difference is not in the languages themselves," says
lead author Eralso Paulescu of the Uniseristy of Milan Bicocca.
"It's in their writing systems, which vary in complexity for
historical reasons."
English has 1,120 different ways of spelling its 40
phomemes. By contrast, Italian needs only 33 combinations of
lettters to spell out its 25 phonemes. As a result, reading Italian
takes a lot less effort, and that's probably why the reported rate of
dyslexia in Italy is barely half that in the US, where about 15% of
the population is afffected to varying degrees. By some estimates,
Americans spend more than $1 billion a year to help their kids cope
with dyslexia. Many Italian dyslexics, on the other hand, aren't even
aware they have a problem - and would notice it only if given a
battery of psychological tests.
-0- |
|
| Attachment: (image/jpeg) Shaw_quote.jpg [not stored] |
|
--
- /bob /mk/brMm
/wUdstak /nV /jDk
"wun simpol
iz az gUd Az anuHD prOvFdid
evriwun
atAcez H sEm mIniN tM it."
- /gPJ /bxnRd
/SY
|
|
|
| 1056 |
From: Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@b...>
Date: Sat Jun 2, 2001 1:04pm
Subject: Re: A kwCi
|
| |
|
Cutler wrote:
May I have your comments and transliteration to the Shavian alphabet of the two sentences:
A bird flew into a Boeing, & The President unveiled a plaque.
a bxd flM intM a /bOiN, n H prezadant unvEld a plAk
(I've noticed that this is identical to how Scott writes it)
Hugh Birkenhead |
|
|
| 1057 |
From: Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@b...>
Date: Sat Jun 2, 2001 2:39pm
Subject: Shavian Forums
|
| |
All,
Over the last few weeks I have been working to construct a set of advanced
Shavian message boards, designed to complement the current eGroups
e-mail-based solution.
The message boards cater for postings in both Roman and Shaw alphabets. The
boards are also web-based, and so require no HTML-enabled mail reader to
post in Shavian. The Shavian postings utilise the 'Lionspaw' font, which
seems to be the most commonly held font face.
My main reason for wishing to departing from the current eGroups system is
that some longstanding members of the group seem to be becoming somewhat
alienated by the dominance of certain topics, e.g. phonetics, use of
characters, etc. Everyone has to read what one person has to say, whether
they want to read it or not. With the message boards, topics can be
discussed in separate forums, and only accessed if the reader expresses an
interest in doing so. Also, if more people are going to join the Shavian
online community, there should be a way that they can ask their questions
without them getting swamped by other ongoing discussions.
At present the boards can be found HERE:
http://www.shavian.f2s.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi
It would be great if as many of you as possible could try these boards out,
if only for you to decide if my solution is any improvement on our current
system. If it turns out that it is lacking in certain areas I would
appreciate it if people could let me know by posting on the boards. If it
turns out that it works well, I would equally appreciate feedback.
Many thanks in advance for any comments received.
Regards,
Hugh Birkenhead
www.mixsynth.btinternet.co.uk
|
|
| 1058 |
From: Paige Gabhart <pgabhart@c...>
Date: Sun Jun 3, 2001 8:19pm
Subject: Re: Shavian Standard Spelling
|
| |
At 12:38 PM 6/1/01 +0200, you wrote:
PRONUNCIATION versus GRAMMAR
Paige Gabhart writes: I believe the
idea that Shavian spells everything one way is clearly wrong and not
necessary for good communication.
In my country where there are eleven official
languages, standard PRONUNCIATION is essential for communication.
English is the lingua franca of the courts, parliament, schools and
universities most of the population are trying to deal with a language
that is not their own. English taught by non-English teachers leads to
distortion of the language, which is becoming unrecognisable in some
instances. Even newscasters can be unintelligible. We hear
that a bed flew into a Boeing , The President unvealed a plague and
other misleading information, the meaning of which must be guessed
at. Bad grammar is far less misleading.
You are in a situation vastly different from most English speech
communities around the world. English makes distinctions between
its vowels, which many non-native speakers apparently find difficult to
hear and reproduce. You clearly have newscasters who have not
mastered English phonemes if they are making statements such as you
quote above.
But my point was that English is spoken world-wide. There are and
I expect there will always be some variations in pronunciations.
Americans do not have much trouble understanding what Australians say,
any more than the British have trouble understanding the speech of
Canadians. If we can understand the speech, it is obvious we can
understand the minor variations in spelling that will inevitably
occur. The widespread dissemination of all types of English
speech by modern telecommunications seems likely to prevent any further
significant fracturing of English into parochial dialects that are
unintelligible to other English speech communities. No matter
what major variety of English -- American, British, Canadian,
Austalian, etc. -- you base your Shavian writing upon, your students
can learn that and they will be intelligible to other English
speakers. And they won't be flying "beds" into Boeings.
If you try to mandate "correct" spellings of words, which does not
mirror the actual speech of a given community of speakers then you are
putting us back into the same situation we have now with the roman
alphabet -- an ostensible alphabetic system which fails the basic
premise of an alphabet, i.e. one symbol for each sound in the
language. Secondly, given the inevitable, although slow, shift of
pronounciation over time, maintaining the concept of a "correct"
spelling in a revised alphabet such as Shavian or Quikscript will tend
to fossilize the written form of the language so that spelling does not
evolve and stay current with pronunciation. Thus, over time we
would be back in the same boat we are in now with the roman alphabet.
As Kingsley Read noted in the introduction to his Quikscript Manual,
one of the reasons he discarded the roman alphabet was because of the
prejudice favoring "correct" spellings. Any attempted revision of
the roman alphabet to make it more phonetic while retaining the
existing letters runs us headlong into the "correct" spelling
problem. For example, can you write "wuz" for "was" or "ruff" for
"rough" and not feel illiterate? I cannot.
L
Académie Française was formed by the Cardinal de Richelieu in 1635 to
allay the chaos caused by erratic spelling and pronunciation that made
French almost unintelligible to the French. Standardisation of spelling
et cetera saved the country millions.
Yet, as a later post pointed out, French shares with English the
distinction of being so inefficient in protraying its pronunciation
that its dyslexics have far more trouble than native Italian
speakers. I remember a conversation with a French ballet
instructor, who was irritated when I commented that French spelling was
not phonetic. She told me that French was completely
phonetic. The verb ending "aient" comes to mind, which, if I
remember correctly, is not pronounced at all. That is certainly
phonetic! It would have been useful while they were standardizing
French spelling to have made it phonetic at the same time.
Nevertheless, I am not suggesting that some standardization of spelling
is not useful. My contention is that the majority of words will
be spelled by fluent English speakers the same way. A much
smaller percentage will exhibit differences from one speech community
to another.
The
whole purpose of Shavian is to obviate ambiguity. The problem of
ambiguity would fall away if each sound were to have a symbol of its
own. The sound of the symbol would be inflexible it would be foolish to
re-create a possibility of ambiguity in spelling.
English speakers already pronounce various words differently. You
cannot pretend they don't by trying to force one manner of spelling on
them. I have read posts by British English speakers stating they
use a particular vowel in several words given as examples. Since
I would have used 2 or sometimes 3 different vowels in the examples
they chose, I am left clueless as to how they actually pronounce that
particular symbol. Absent audio files, we cannot know how someone
else pronounces a given Shavian symbol.
I
believe that Shavian should standardise spelling to suit the
pronunciation of the English language most easily understood by those
who do not have English as their first language and have difficulty in
grasping the meaning of it.
How in the world would you determine this, and whose standard would be chosen?
Remember
that people never use words they do not know how to pronounce and so
vocabulary dwindles and common expletives are used instead of
meaningful words. Whole film scripts are made up of oaths and
obscenities to characterise people unable better to express themselves.
You think thugs in movies use expletives because the roman alphabet let
them down and they are afraid to pronounce words in front of their
peers?
A bird flew into a Boeing, & The President unveiled a plaque.
a bard flM intM a /bOIN. H prezadant anvEld a plAk.
|
|
| 1059 |
From: Paige Gabhart <pgabhart@c...>
Date: Sun Jun 3, 2001 8:41pm
Subject: Re: /SFvWn: kMx fP disleksW ?
|
| |
Thanks for pointing this out. I have been complaining for years
that the educational establishment seems to have no cognizance of the
connection between the inefficiency of the roman alphabet for writing
English and the prevalence of students who cannot read. Their
solution is always boils down to "we have to throw more money at the
problem and do a better job of teaching students." They seem
to have no awareness that, just perhaps, the basic system they are
attempting to teach is fatally flawed.
Imagine if you told a student that 2+2=4, except sometimes it equals
5. Oh yeah, and on occasion it equals 7. How well would
students learn addition? Is this really much different for a
student trying to figure out the rules, who is told that "read"
(present tense) is pronounced like "reed," but that
"read" (past tense) is pronounced "red."
Rudolf Fleisch, in his book, "Why Johnny Can't Read," addressed
this some 40 years ago, yet no one seemed to have heard or believed
him.
Paige Gabhart
At 10:45 PM 6/1/01 -0400, you wrote:
/SFvWn:
kMx fP disleksW ?
Excerpted from an article in the US edition of TIME MAGAZINE, March 26,
2001:
In the past couple of decades, scientists have learned a great deal about
the neurological causes of dyslexia. But what they hadn't yet explained
is why its incidence varies so from country to country - and what that
difference means. Last week, Italian French and British researchers
proposed an answer. The variability, they wrote in Science,
depends greatly on the complexity of writing systems.....
According to prevailing theory, the reading centers of the brain break
words down into sound units known as phonemes and recognize them as the
elements of a phonetic code. Then the centers assemble that code to
derive meaning fron the symbols on the page. Most of us learn to do this
seamlessly by the time we're seven years old.
I would question this statement, given the prevalence of remedial reading
classes.
English has 1,120 different ways of
spelling its 40 phomemes. By contrast, Italian needs only 33
combinations of lettters to spell out its 25 phonemes. As a result,
reading Italian takes a lot less effort, and that's probably why the
reported rate of dyslexia in Italy is barely half that in the US, where
about 15% of the population is afffected to varying degrees. By some
estimates, Americans spend more than $1 billion a year to help their kids
cope with dyslexia. Many Italian dyslexics, on the other hand, aren't
even aware they have a problem - and would notice it only if given a
battery of psychological tests.
|
|
| 1060 |
From: Paige Gabhart <pgabhart@c...>
Date: Sun Jun 3, 2001 8:50pm
Subject: Re: Shavian Forums
|
| |
Hugh:
I've registered on your Shavian BB. It looks great to me.
I would like to make a request. How much trouble would it be to add a
board where people could practice Quikscript in addition to Shavian? We
have the "jerome" font available for writing Quikscript.
Thanks
Paige Gabhart
At 02:39 PM 6/2/01 +0100, you wrote:
>All,
>
>Over the last few weeks I have been working to construct a set of advanced
>Shavian message boards, designed to complement the current eGroups
>e-mail-based solution.
>
>The message boards cater for postings in both Roman and Shaw alphabets. The
>boards are also web-based, and so require no HTML-enabled mail reader to
>post in Shavian. The Shavian postings utilise the 'Lionspaw' font, which
>seems to be the most commonly held font face.
>
>My main reason for wishing to departing from the current eGroups system is
>that some longstanding members of the group seem to be becoming somewhat
>alienated by the dominance of certain topics, e.g. phonetics, use of
>characters, etc. Everyone has to read what one person has to say, whether
>they want to read it or not. With the message boards, topics can be
>discussed in separate forums, and only accessed if the reader expresses an
>interest in doing so. Also, if more people are going to join the Shavian
>online community, there should be a way that they can ask their questions
>without them getting swamped by other ongoing discussions.
>
>At present the boards can be found HERE:
>http://www.shavian.f2s.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi
>
>It would be great if as many of you as possible could try these boards out,
>if only for you to decide if my solution is any improvement on our current
>system. If it turns out that it is lacking in certain areas I would
>appreciate it if people could let me know by posting on the boards. If it
>turns out that it works well, I would equally appreciate feedback.
>
>Many thanks in advance for any comments received.
>
>Regards,
>Hugh Birkenhead
>www.mixsynth.btinternet.co.uk
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
|
| 1061 |
From: <sdkilbourn@y...>
Date: Mon Jun 4, 2001 2:31am
Subject: Re: Shavian Forums
|
| |
Hi,
I signed up today. It said it was going to mail me my password. That
was four hours ago. When will I get my password?
Thanks...
--- In shavian@y..., Paige Gabhart <pgabhart@c...> wrote:
> Hugh:
>
> I've registered on your Shavian BB. It looks great to me.
>
> I would like to make a request. How much trouble would it be to
add a
> board where people could practice Quikscript in addition to
Shavian? We
> have the "jerome" font available for writing Quikscript.
>
> Thanks
>
> Paige Gabhart
>
> At 02:39 PM 6/2/01 +0100, you wrote:
> >All,
> >
> >Over the last few weeks I have been working to construct a set of
advanced
> >Shavian message boards, designed to complement the current eGroups
> >e-mail-based solution.
> >
> >The message boards cater for postings in both Roman and Shaw
alphabets. The
> >boards are also web-based, and so require no HTML-enabled mail
reader to
> >post in Shavian. The Shavian postings utilise the 'Lionspaw' font,
which
> >seems to be the most commonly held font face.
> >
> >My main reason for wishing to departing from the current eGroups
system is
> >that some longstanding members of the group seem to be becoming
somewhat
> >alienated by the dominance of certain topics, e.g. phonetics, use
of
> >characters, etc. Everyone has to read what one person has to say,
whether
> >they want to read it or not. With the message boards, topics can be
> >discussed in separate forums, and only accessed if the reader
expresses an
> >interest in doing so. Also, if more people are going to join the
Shavian
> >online community, there should be a way that they can ask their
questions
> >without them getting swamped by other ongoing discussions.
> >
> >At present the boards can be found HERE:
> >http://www.shavian.f2s.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi
> >
> >It would be great if as many of you as possible could try these
boards out,
> >if only for you to decide if my solution is any improvement on our
current
> >system. If it turns out that it is lacking in certain areas I would
> >appreciate it if people could let me know by posting on the
boards. If it
> >turns out that it works well, I would equally appreciate feedback.
> >
> >Many thanks in advance for any comments received.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Hugh Birkenhead
> >www.mixsynth.btinternet.co.uk
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
|
| 1062 |
From: <sdkilbourn@y...>
Date: Mon Jun 4, 2001 2:36am
Subject: Kingsley Font?
|
| |
Hi,
I was looking over the Revised Shaw Alphabet of Kingsley Read
document in the files section. I have all the fonts except one
named "Kingsley", which I cannot find anywhere. Does anyone know
where I can find it?
Thanks.
|
|
| 1063 |
From: Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@b...>
Date: Tue Jun 5, 2001 0:18am
Subject: Re: Re: Shavian Forums
|
| |
Is anyone else having trouble receiving their password via e-mail?
If the feature does not work as it should I will turn it off.
Hugh
----- Original Message -----
From: <sdkilbourn@y...>
To: <shavian@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2001 2:31 AM
Subject: [shavian] Re: Shavian Forums
> Hi,
>
> I signed up today. It said it was going to mail me my password. That
> was four hours ago. When will I get my password?
>
> Thanks...
>
> --- In shavian@y..., Paige Gabhart <pgabhart@c...> wrote:
> > Hugh:
> >
> > I've registered on your Shavian BB. It looks great to me.
> >
> > I would like to make a request. How much trouble would it be to
> add a
> > board where people could practice Quikscript in addition to
> Shavian? We
> > have the "jerome" font available for writing Quikscript.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Paige Gabhart
> >
> > At 02:39 PM 6/2/01 +0100, you wrote:
> > >All,
> > >
> > >Over the last few weeks I have been working to construct a set of
> advanced
> > >Shavian message boards, designed to complement the current eGroups
> > >e-mail-based solution.
> > >
> > >The message boards cater for postings in both Roman and Shaw
> alphabets. The
> > >boards are also web-based, and so require no HTML-enabled mail
> reader to
> > >post in Shavian. The Shavian postings utilise the 'Lionspaw' font,
> which
> > >seems to be the most commonly held font face.
> > >
> > >My main reason for wishing to departing from the current eGroups
> system is
> > >that some longstanding members of the group seem to be becoming
> somewhat
> > >alienated by the dominance of certain topics, e.g. phonetics, use
> of
> > >characters, etc. Everyone has to read what one person has to say,
> whether
> > >they want to read it or not. With the message boards, topics can be
> > >discussed in separate forums, and only accessed if the reader
> expresses an
> > >interest in doing so. Also, if more people are going to join the
> Shavian
> > >online community, there should be a way that they can ask their
> questions
> > >without them getting swamped by other ongoing discussions.
> > >
> > >At present the boards can be found HERE:
> > >http://www.shavian.f2s.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi
> > >
> > >It would be great if as many of you as possible could try these
> boards out,
> > >if only for you to decide if my solution is any improvement on our
> current
> > >system. If it turns out that it is lacking in certain areas I would
> > >appreciate it if people could let me know by posting on the
> boards. If it
> > >turns out that it works well, I would equally appreciate feedback.
> > >
> > >Many thanks in advance for any comments received.
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >Hugh Birkenhead
> > >www.mixsynth.btinternet.co.uk
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
|
|
| 1064 |
From: Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@b...>
Date: Tue Jun 5, 2001 1:13am
Subject: Re: Shavian Forums
|
| |
Hi Paige
A Quikscript board shouldn't be too much trouble in principle, it would take
a while to sort the font face change out for the new boards, but I could
just adapt the code used for the Shavian ones.
Before any more boards are created though (it takes a lot to get the
different font faces to work) I'd like to see how well the current ones
work - if it turns out that people like and use them I'll certainly create
more boards to fit the demand.
Hugh
----- Original Message -----
From: Paige Gabhart <pgabhart@c...>
To: <shavian@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 8:50 PM
Subject: Re: [shavian] Shavian Forums
> Hugh:
>
> I've registered on your Shavian BB. It looks great to me.
>
> I would like to make a request. How much trouble would it be to add a
> board where people could practice Quikscript in addition to Shavian? We
> have the "jerome" font available for writing Quikscript.
>
> Thanks
>
> Paige Gabhart
>
> At 02:39 PM 6/2/01 +0100, you wrote:
> >All,
> >
> >Over the last few weeks I have been working to construct a set of
advanced
> >Shavian message boards, designed to complement the current eGroups
> >e-mail-based solution.
> >
> >The message boards cater for postings in both Roman and Shaw alphabets.
The
> >boards are also web-based, and so require no HTML-enabled mail reader to
> >post in Shavian. The Shavian postings utilise the 'Lionspaw' font, which
> >seems to be the most commonly held font face.
> >
> >My main reason for wishing to departing from the current eGroups system
is
> >that some longstanding members of the group seem to be becoming somewhat
> >alienated by the dominance of certain topics, e.g. phonetics, use of
> >characters, etc. Everyone has to read what one person has to say, whether
> >they want to read it or not. With the message boards, topics can be
> >discussed in separate forums, and only accessed if the reader expresses
an
> >interest in doing so. Also, if more people are going to join the Shavian
> >online community, there should be a way that they can ask their questions
> >without them getting swamped by other ongoing discussions.
> >
> >At present the boards can be found HERE:
> >http://www.shavian.f2s.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi
> >
> >It would be great if as many of you as possible could try these boards
out,
> >if only for you to decide if my solution is any improvement on our
current
> >system. If it turns out that it is lacking in certain areas I would
> >appreciate it if people could let me know by posting on the boards. If it
> >turns out that it works well, I would equally appreciate feedback.
> >
> >Many thanks in advance for any comments received.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Hugh Birkenhead
> >www.mixsynth.btinternet.co.uk
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
|
|
| 1065 |
From: Paige Gabhart <pgabhart@c...>
Date: Tue Jun 5, 2001 3:11am
Subject: Re: Shavian Forums
|
| |
Hugh:
Per your request to let you know, I never received a password from
ikonboard either. Thanks for the response regarding the possibility of
adding a Quikscript board down the road. Something I had not previously
mentioned: due to my long time familiarity with Quikscript and my lack of
exposure to Shavian for some 25 years, once the Jerome font became
available (with its key mapping the same as Shavian, except for the extra
letters and half-letters Quikscript has that Shavian does not), I copy the
e-mails in Shavian and paste them into my word processor and then convert
them to Jerome. This makes reading them a snap. I also avoid increasing
my "cognitive dissonance" level, which is inherent in trying to become
fluent in reading both scripts since a few symbols in Shavian stand for
different phonemes in Quikscript.
Paige
At 01:13 AM 6/5/2001 +0100, you wrote:
>Hi Paige
>
>A Quikscript board shouldn't be too much trouble in principle, it would take
>a while to sort the font face change out for the new boards, but I could
>just adapt the code used for the Shavian ones.
>
>Hugh
>
>--
> > >
> > >www.mixsynth.btinternet.co.uk
>
|
|
| 1066 |
From: Robert McBroom <info@o...>
Date: Tue Jun 5, 2001 11:02pm
Subject: same here
|
| |
As you fellows, I've been waiting 3 days for my password.
--
- Robert McBroom
Manager
Onteora Mountain House
Boiceville NY
845-657-6233
|
|
| 1067 |
From: craig <ccranko@o...>
Date: Thu Jun 7, 2001 0:50am
Subject: Re: Digest Number 140
|
| |
Please unsubscribe me from your list
--
Craig Cranko
Tel: +61 02 9417 0454
Fax: +61 02 9417 0456
Mob: +61 0414 431 442
ccranko@o...
45 Allard Avenue
East Roseville 2069
Australia
|
|
| 1068 |
From: Robert McBroom <info@o...>
Date: Sat Jun 9, 2001 1:35am
Subject: News of the world
|
| |
|
News of the wXld or at
least the wemstxn hemisfC
* fVx strOks fP mP fOlks
........So many Japanese are using the Short Message Service
on their cellular telephones that thousands of "repetitive
stress syndrome" injuries were reported last year, due to the
users' incessant "thumbing." (Of course, we presume they
are thumbing in Japanese.) Short Message Service will reach the
United State in the next few years, so it seems that we will all have
sore thumbs - unless someone comes up with a handy shorthand code to
cut down the number of strokes in a message.
* wF kAnt /JYnI
rId? The city of Chicago ("hog butcher to the
world") has shown great progress in the last few years in
improving its sad school system. Test scores rose in all areas in the
last few years, but this year, reading scores have
"stagnated" and they just don't know why. Richard Daley,
the Mayor, has promised to spend more money on teaching reading.
* a vaniSiN
industrI? The National Spelling Bee (read
contest) was held in Washington DC last week. A boy won $10,000 for
spelling succedaneum. The spelling bee, which is at
least 40 years old, is sponsored by a large American newspaper
chain - in the belief, perhaps, that encouraging proper spelling will
foster more newspaper readership. Strangely, all 40 national
winners have seemed to slip back into immediate obscurity and are
never heard from again. Note: the winner was never asked the meaning
of succedaneum.
* a blIk fYkast fY H
web.... English may be the dominant language on the web
today, but one big accounting firm here is quoting statistics that by
2005, Chinese will be the dominant language. Now there's a
character set to ponder.
salVtEsuns,
|
|
| Attachment: (application/mac-binhex40) Sh_logo.72 [not stored] |
--
- Robert McBroom
Manager
Onteora Mountain House
Boiceville NY
845-657-6233
|
|
| 1069 |
From: Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@b...>
Date: Fri Jun 8, 2001 7:01pm
Subject: Forum passwords
|
| |
All,
Scott informs me he has just received his password. I should think all of
you who have signed up will receive your passwords before long.
Just to let you know - I have now removed the 'email passwords to new users'
feature - any new users to sign up will be able to obtain their passwords
immediately from their web browser. No more waiting, hopefully!
Regards,
Hugh
|
|
| 1070 |
From: <teraiten@y...>
Date: Tue Jun 12, 2001 2:13pm
Subject: The difference between OO and OO and Esperanto
|
| |
Hi,
I'm Dutch and I find it difficult to define the difference between the
OO in OOze and the OO in wOOl.
Can somebody help me?
I also have another question: Is there a Shavian (or Quikscript)
version that has been developed for Esperanto? Just wondering.
Yours,
Ewout Stam
|
|
| 1071 |
From: Philip Newton <philip.newton@d...>
Date: Tue Jun 12, 2001 3:06pm
Subject: Re: The difference between OO and OO and Esperanto
|
| |
teraiten@y... wrote:
> I'm Dutch and I find it difficult to define the difference
> between the OO in OOze and the OO in wOOl.
>
> Can somebody help me?
Well, the OO in OOze is AFAIK more or less like the sound written 'oe' in
Dutch, or like long u in German (e.g. 'gut').
I don't know whether the sound of OO in wOOl (or pUt or bOOk) occurs in
Dutch, but it's similar to short u in German (e.g. 'Dutt', 'spucken').
> I also have another question: Is there a Shavian (or Quikscript)
> version that has been developed for Esperanto? Just wondering.
Yes.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@d...>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
|
|
| 1072 |
From: Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@b...>
Date: Tue Jun 12, 2001 6:31pm
Subject: Re: The difference between OO and OO and Esperanto
|
| |
Hi
I'd consult an English dictionary to find a good explanation of the
difference. One short way to put it: open the lips slightly for saying
'wOOl', and close them a bit for saying 'OOze'.
Someone else might be able to offer a better description!
Hugh
----- Original Message -----
From: <teraiten@y...>
To: <shavian@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 2:13 PM
Subject: [shavian] The difference between OO and OO and Esperanto
> Hi,
>
> I'm Dutch and I find it difficult to define the difference between the
> OO in OOze and the OO in wOOl.
>
> Can somebody help me?
>
> I also have another question: Is there a Shavian (or Quikscript)
> version that has been developed for Esperanto? Just wondering.
>
> Yours,
>
> Ewout Stam
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
|
|
| 1073 |
From: Robert McBroom <info@o...>
Date: Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:58am
Subject: Re: The difference between OO and OO and Esperanto
|
| |
Here in the Eastern end of the USA, wOOl almost rhymes with bUll.
This tends to make the distinction between cOOl and wOOl seem very
large.
I can see why it wouldnt be apparent to someone who spoke Dutch with
their elogated OO's.
>Hi,
>
>I'm Dutch and I find it difficult to define the difference between the
>OO in OOze and the OO in wOOl.
>
>Can somebody help me?
>
>I also have another question: Is there a Shavian (or Quikscript)
>version that has been developed for Esperanto? Just wondering.
>
>Yours,
>
>Ewout Stam
>
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--
- /bob /mk/brMm
/wUdstak /nV /jDk
"wun simpol iz az gUd Az anuHD prOvFdid
evriwun atAcez H sEm mIniN tM it."
- /gPJ /bxnRd /SY
|
|
| 1074 |
From: Philip Newton <philip.newton@g...>
Date: Wed Jun 13, 2001 6:34am
Subject: Re: The difference between OO and OO and Esperanto
|
| |
On 13 Jun 01, at 0:58, Robert McBroom wrote:
> Here in the Eastern end of the USA, wOOl almost rhymes with bUll.
For me, they rhyme completely. I consider the sounds of wOOl, bUll,
pUt, and lOOk to be the same.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@g...>
|
|
| 1075 |
From: <teraiten@y...>
Date: Wed Jun 13, 2001 8:22pm
Subject: Re: The difference between OO and OO and Esperanto
|
| |
--- In shavian@y..., Robert McBroom <info@o...> wrote:
> Here in the Eastern end of the USA, wOOl almost rhymes with bUll.
> This tends to make the distinction between cOOl and wOOl seem very
> large.
>
> I can see why it wouldnt be apparent to someone who spoke Dutch
with
> their elogated OO's.
>
Perhaps I must tell you about another sound that the Dutch language
has, the 'uu'. The sound
doesn't completely exist in English though, but only partially. It's
kinda like 'trUth', but without any traces of an 'oo' in it. Is that
the difference I'm looking for? An 'oo'-sound with a little 'uu' in
it? It's still not easy, but provides something of a definition.
Ewout
|
|
| 1076 |
From: Philip Newton <philip.newton@d...>
Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 7:15am
Subject: Re: Re: The difference between OO and OO and Esperanto
|
| |
teraiten@y... wrote:
> 'uu'
I think that's pronounced similar to the German 'ü', isn't it? If so, it's
not particularly close to the English sound in "bOOk". Sorry.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@d...>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
|
|
| 1077 |
From: Scott Harrison <scott_harrison@a...>
Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 7:42am
Subject: Why on earth use Shavian for Esperanto?
|
| |
Hi,
Why on earth are people using Shavian for Esperanto?
As is evident from my translation* of The Swineherd, I believe
texts that contain languages that use Roman** characters that are not
English should not use Shavian characters. Shavian is not designed to
be used with languages other than English. It even falls short with
certain sounds that have been brought into English from other languages
(like ch from loch). Therefore, I find it inappropriate to attempt to
render French or German in Shavian for example.
Now with respect to Esperanto, there is no need to use Shavian. It
already has a one-to-one correspondence of letters to sound except for
the diphthongs formed with j. Since aj, ej, and oj are represented by
one character in Shavian, you would save space by using Shavian.
However, Shavian takes two characters to represent c, and cannot
represent ^h. Therefore, it is really appropriate to use Shavian for
Esperanto?
--
Scott Harrison
* I do consider my work translation instead of transcription and I do
know the difference. Others may disagree.
** Yes, this means Latin characters. However, using this term
distinguishes between the characters and language.
|
|
| 1078 |
From: Scott Harrison <scott_harrison@a...>
Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 7:45am
Subject: Outlook Express can do Unicode Shavian mail
|
| |
Hi,
I have tested Outlook Express on Windows NT with the keyboard
driver I made that outputs Shavian at its "proper" Unicode points. I
can both send and receive Shavian mail in Unicode with it. This means
one can freely mix Shavian and Roman characters in the same text without
silly font changes.
What mailers are people using?
--
Scott Harrison
|
|
| 1079 |
From: Philip Newton <philip.newton@d...>
Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 8:54am
Subject: Re: Why on earth use Shavian for Esperanto?
|
| |
Scott Harrison wrote:
> However, Shavian takes two characters to represent c, and cannot
> represent ^h. Therefore, it is really appropriate to use Shavian for
> Esperanto?
Not the way it's presented in _Androcles_. However, the version I saw
adapted Shavian and gave different values to certain Shavian letters to
correspond to Esperanto phonemes.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@d...>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
|
|
| 1080 |
From: Philip Newton <philip.newton@d...>
Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 8:55am
Subject: Re: Outlook Express can do Unicode Shavian mail
|
| |
Scott Harrison wrote:
> What mailers are people using?
At work: Outlook 98, WinNT 4.0
At home: Pegasus Mail, Win98 SE
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@d...>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
|
|
| 1081 |
From: Brion L. VIBBER <brion@p...>
Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 9:19am
Subject: Re: Why on earth use Shavian for Esperanto?
|
| |
Thought I'd butt in here. Hi, I'm new. Blah blah blah, introduce myself. Blah
blah just found out about Shavian the other day, think it's interesting.
Would write this in Shavian, but am too lazy to change the font and sit with
a reference sheet for an hour. :)
Je Merkredo, la 13a de Junio 2001 11:42 pm, Scott Harrison skribis:
> Shavian is not designed to be used with languages other than English.
[snip]
> Therefore, I find it inappropriate to attempt to render French or German in
> Shavian for example.
French needs spelling reform as much as English does. You ever tried to spell
a French word you've only heard? It's impossible! Au ton? Au temps? Autant?
It's somewhat easier to pronounce correctly from unfamiliar written text, but
still not completely consistently. But see below...
> Now with respect to Esperanto, there is no need to use Shavian. It
> already has a one-to-one correspondence of letters to sound except for
The one thing Shavian _does_ have* that's desirable for other languages is a
directly visible correspondence between voiced and unvoiced consonants which
isn't consistently shown in the Roman alphabet. Japanese kana, for instance,
do this clearly and easily with a simple mark on syllables with voiced
consonants to distinguish them from the unvoiced equivalents. In Roman we see
a vague similarity with SZ/sz, and maybe PB/pb, but FV/fv? TD/td? KG/kg? It's
easy to forget the sounds are so closely related when we think of them as
completely different letters. And of course, no need to learn twice as many
letters for those useless capitals.
That said, as you say Shavian per se isn't very appropriate for Esperanto
without two additional consonants - hh (as in Bach, loch) and c (which isn't
exactly t+s) - and revaluing almost all of the relevant vowels (and some
consonants - r is completely different, and d and t should be dentals).
French or German similarly would require different changes.
I would expect that anyone seriously proposing to use Shavian for Esperanto
would modify it suitably, just as the Roman alphabet is modified to suit
every language that uses it (except, sadly, English) by dropping, adding, or
accenting letters.
* Note that the thing I think it's really _missing_ is clear indication for
the stressed syllable. Some English words can only be distinguished by
stress, and unfamiliar words can have randomly-placed stress that leads to
incorrect pronunciation when the reader guesses wrong and then uses the word
in public. That's not relevent for French or Esperanto though, which have
much more regular stress patterns.
-- brion vibber (brion@p... / vibber@u...)
|
|
| 1082 |
From: Brion L. VIBBER <brion@p...>
Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 10:08am
Subject: Re: Outlook Express can do Unicode Shavian mail
|
| |
Je Merkredo, la 13a de Junio 2001 11:45 pm, Scott Harrison skribis:
> What mailers are people using?
KMail 1.2 (Unix)
It does speak Unicode, as long as I can configure an appropriate font. (Do
any of the Shavian fonts have Shavian in the [temporary] Unicode positions,
but Roman in the Latin-1 area?)
Send something out, we'll see how it looks...
-- brion vibber (brion@p... / vibber@u...)
|
|
| 1083 |
From: Scott Harrison <scott_harrison@a...>
Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 10:47am
Subject: Re: Why on earth use Shavian for Esperanto?
|
| |
On Thursday, June 14, 2001, at 10:19 , Brion L. VIBBER wrote:
>
> Je Merkredo, la 13a de Junio 2001 11:42 pm, Scott Harrison skribis:
I love this ^^^^^^^
>> Shavian is not designed to be used with languages other than English.
> [snip]
>> Therefore, I find it inappropriate to attempt to render French or
>> German in
>> Shavian for example.
>
> French needs spelling reform as much as English does. You ever tried to
> spell
> a French word you've only heard? It's impossible! Au ton? Au temps?
> Autant?
> It's somewhat easier to pronounce correctly from unfamiliar written
> text, but
> still not completely consistently. But see below...
Oh how I do know about how French needs spelling reform. I live in
Paris and run into the problem where I do not know a word and ask people
to spell it because then I can remember it better than just repeating
it. However, Shavian in its present form probably should not be used
for French. There are sounds in French Shavian does not have. If we
were to have French Shavian I would advocate extending the alphabet and
adding some new characters for the French sounds. I would not want to
remap present Shavian characters to the French sounds as that would
cause confusion for those that need to read both.
>
>> Now with respect to Esperanto, there is no need to use Shavian. It
>> already has a one-to-one correspondence of letters to sound except for
>
> The one thing Shavian _does_ have* that's desirable for other languages
> is a
> directly visible correspondence between voiced and unvoiced consonants
> which
> isn't consistently shown in the Roman alphabet. Japanese kana, for
> instance,
> do this clearly and easily with a simple mark on syllables with voiced
> consonants to distinguish them from the unvoiced equivalents. In Roman
> we see
> a vague similarity with SZ/sz, and maybe PB/pb, but FV/fv? TD/td?
> KG/kg? It's
> easy to forget the sounds are so closely related when we think of them
> as
> completely different letters. And of course, no need to learn twice as
> many
> letters for those useless capitals.
Agreed. I was impressed with the correspondence in shape of letters
with how sounds are formed. Differences between consonants and vowels
is also useful.
>
> That said, as you say Shavian per se isn't very appropriate for
> Esperanto
> without two additional consonants - hh (as in Bach, loch) and c (which
> isn't
> exactly t+s) - and revaluing almost all of the relevant vowels (and some
> consonants - r is completely different, and d and t should be dentals).
> French or German similarly would require different changes.
>
> I would expect that anyone seriously proposing to use Shavian for
> Esperanto
> would modify it suitably, just as the Roman alphabet is modified to suit
> every language that uses it (except, sadly, English) by dropping,
> adding, or
> accenting letters.
This seems the logical thing to do. This is the way I would go about
doing it. However, if we take this to extremese, are we not just
redoing IPA?
>
> * Note that the thing I think it's really _missing_ is clear indication
> for
> the stressed syllable. Some English words can only be distinguished by
> stress, and unfamiliar words can have randomly-placed stress that leads
> to
> incorrect pronunciation when the reader guesses wrong and then uses the
> word
> in public. That's not relevent for French or Esperanto though, which
> have
> much more regular stress patterns.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion@pobox.com / vibber@usc.edu)
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
--
Scott Harrison
|
| Attachment: (text/enriched) [not stored] |
|
| 1084 |
From: Scott Harrison <scott_harrison@a...>
Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 10:49am
Subject: Fwd: Outlook Express can do Unicode Shavian mail
|
| |
Hi,
Failed to notice sending this from the wrong account earlier.
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Mayhem Elkhound <mayhem@m...>
> Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 11:39:33 Europe/Paris
> To: shavian@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [shavian] Outlook Express can do Unicode Shavian mail
>
>
> On Thursday, June 14, 2001, at 11:08 , Brion L. VIBBER wrote:
>
>> Je Merkredo, la 13a de Junio 2001 11:45 pm, Scott Harrison skribis:
>>> What mailers are people using?
>>
>> KMail 1.2 (Unix)
>> It does speak Unicode, as long as I can configure an appropriate font.
>> (Do
>> any of the Shavian fonts have Shavian in the [temporary] Unicode
>> positions,
>> but Roman in the Latin-1 area?)
>>
>
> There is a font on my web page that was created by Phillip Driscoll
> that is Arial and Shavian with Roman and Shavian letters in both their
> proper Unicode places. If you download that and install it
> appropriately (it is TrueType) you should be able to read all my UTF-8
> web pages assuming your web browser can be configured to use the font
> for web pages. The same goes for letting your mail app use it. All
> you then need it to be able to generate the Shavian Unicode points when
> you type and you can converse with me via Unicode mail in Shavian.
>
> Oh yeah, if you do not know - the web page is http://www.mithrandir.com
> and then follow the links to Software and Shavian.
>
--
Scott Harrison
>
|
|
|
|
Yahoo! Sponsored Links
|
A Gateway to Jewish Culture:
Nextbook.org is your gateway to Jewish literature, culture and ideas,
with readings, lectures, and performances in Chicago, Seattle, and
Washington DC.
www.nextbook.org
Canadian Culture at Your Fingertips:
Discover Canada's diversity and immerse yourself in its culture. Search
thousands of quality cultural resources about art, history, sports,
media, festivals and events.
www.culture.ca
Fungi Perfecti, Mushroom Cultures:
We grow over 200 species, 41 are certified organic gourmet and
medicinal mushrooms. We offer: Mushroom kits, mycomedicinals, books,
gifts, cultures, cultivation seminars, tools and more.
www.fungi.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
= Owner
= Moderator
= Online