|
|
|
| 3043 |
From: Joe <allegrox_2000@y...>
Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 8:41am
Subject: Re: The Periodic Table
|
| |
--- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "tithhmi" <tithhmi@y...> wrote:
[snip]
> or, we could follow the standard method of abbreviation in the ROman
> orthography, placing a period at the end of each symbol. By
> following this, we would have a standard symbol recognised by all
> English speakers, and we would not need any new symbols, and IO would
> strongly emphasize our lacking new symbols.
> -tithhmi
[snip]
Or, even better, instead of putting a period at the end of every symbol, we could just
use it as a separator between symbols. But I think that may not work as well when
handwritten. You have to be careful about dots, including periods. When they're
typed, they're little circles of different sizes (usually) precisely positioned every time.
But when they're handwritten, they tend to all be the same size (unless you take extra
care with the larger ones) and positioned somewhat irregularly. But maybe that's just
my bad handwriting.
|
|
| 3044 |
From:  Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@f...>
Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 10:53am
Subject: Re: Re: standardization
|
| |
Ethan wrote:
> Sure thing. Here's what I got:
>
> ***Begin Error Message***
>
> Ikonboard CGI Error Ikonboard has exited with the following error:
>
> Can't open file
> (/your/path/to/hugh/ikonboard/Database/active_sessions/active_sessions.db)
> for reading. Permission denied
>
> This error was reported at: Sources/iDatabase/Driver/DBM.pm line 246.
>
> Please note that your 'real' paths have been removed to protect your
> information.
>
> ***End Error Message***
>
> Hugh, try reloading the page. It may be you're getting a working page
> out of your cache, rather than the current page, which appears to have a
> problem.
Just have. Deleted the cache and tried it too. Works absolutely fine from
here. Also, Paul V posted as recently as two days ago so it's obviously
working for him too.
Maybe it's because the forums don't like the browser or OS you're using? I
can't think why they wouldn't...
> ·ð‘°ð‘”ð‘©ð‘¯ - Ethan
·ð‘£ð‘¿ ·𑚠- Hugh B (still can't see those letters)
|
|
| 3045 |
From: Philip Newton <philip.newton@g...>
Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:24am
Subject: shavian.org has moved
|
| |
Hello all Shavianists,
shavian.org has now moved to a new server, kindly hosted by Scott
Harrison. Hopefully, things will Just Work; if not, please let me now
and I'll try to see what I can do.
If you need to get at the old server for some reason, you can use
http://old.shavian.org/ until that gets switched off.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@g...>
|
|
| 3046 |
From: Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@f...>
Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:24am
Subject: Re: Re: dictionary choice
|
| |
Joe wrote:
> I just want to clarify something: I don't think it's about representing
the majority or
> anybody else. It's about choosing the accent that is most comprehensible.
It doesn't
> have to be anybody's accent, as long as the majority (or preferably
everybody) can
> understand it.
> Widely understandable, not widely representative.
Well, in that case, there are many accents to choose from. We could choose
old-fashioned RP: "hev you gought a metch, cunstable?" Many Americans seem
to think that Brits still speak like that!! And indeed that's the accent a
lot of American students I've met here put on to impersonate Brits. But it's
antiquated, and besides, I've never heard it spoken WELL by any of those US
students...!
We could choose standard US TV English, a la "Friends", or any US programme
really. These programmes are shown in the UK more often than British-made
programmes these days, and nobody complains that they can't understand them.
But ask a Brit to speak like that - and they most often can't. It's only a
one way thing.
One way or another the choice is too great. Then we look at the remarkably
simple-to-access www.dictionary.com - this uses the AHD pronunciation guide
The pronunciation represented by the AHD could hardly be classed as
incomprehensible to either Americans or Brits - and don't forget, it's
phonemic, just like Shavian, so either party would never realise the other
party were pronouncing the same letter differently.
So *why not* the AHD? Is it just too similar to Shavian, too comprehensible,
too neutral and too easy to access?
Hugh B
|
|
| 3047 |
From: Philip Newton <philip.newton@g...>
Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:55am
Subject: Ikonboard down (was Re: Re: standardization)
|
| |
On 10 Apr 2004 at 10:53, Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
> Just have. Deleted the cache and tried it too. Works absolutely fine
> from here. Also, Paul V posted as recently as two days ago so it's
> obviously working for him too.
>
> Maybe it's because the forums don't like the browser or OS you're
> using? I can't think why they wouldn't...
It's because of the move to the new server, undoubtedly, which took
place on Friday. (You may still have the old IP address in your ISP's
DNS cache, and will probably see the same problems when the cached
entry expires.)
The "can't open for reading" I "fixed" by making all files world
writable (since it actually wanted to open the database for reading
*and* writing), but now it says something about an "inappropriate file
type or format", and I don't think I know how to fix that. Do you have
any idea?
Again, for the time being, you may be able to use
http://old.shavian.org/hugh/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi instead (as soon as
you can see those DNS entries, that is).
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@g...>
|
|
| 3048 |
From: Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@f...>
Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 2:41pm
Subject: Re: Ikonboard down (was Re: Re: standardization)
|
| |
Philip Newton wrote:
> On 10 Apr 2004 at 10:53, Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
>
> > Just have. Deleted the cache and tried it too. Works absolutely fine
> > from here. Also, Paul V posted as recently as two days ago so it's
> > obviously working for him too.
Hang on, what about this? Paul V was posting to them too, so how come he
could do it as well as me?
> It's because of the move to the new server, undoubtedly, which took
> place on Friday. (You may still have the old IP address in your ISP's
> DNS cache, and will probably see the same problems when the cached
> entry expires.)
Now I've just tried them and it isn't working beyond the forum index page.
The graphics aren't loading either. Have you moved them to
'old.shavian.org'? It was working OK before, I'm certain.
> The "can't open for reading" I "fixed" by making all files world
> writable (since it actually wanted to open the database for reading
> *and* writing), but now it says something about an "inappropriate file
> type or format", and I don't think I know how to fix that. Do you have
> any idea?
I've got no idea as I can't see the problem. I'm not hosting it so I can't
access it.
To make this whole thing simpler I might as well just host them at my
webspace - mixsynth.fearfulsilence.com. I have 25MB space with room for
enlargement, it supports CGI and other extensions, and a good friend of mine
owns the domain. All I'd need to do is copy all the files to my area, change
a few URLs within some files, and then set appropriate file permissions.
> Again, for the time being, you may be able to use
> http://old.shavian.org/hugh/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi instead (as soon as
> you can see those DNS entries, that is).
No, I can't, yet.
Get back to me if you want me to host the forums now. I've been able to for
a few months now and I'm sure I mentioned it earlier...
Hugh B
|
|
| 3049 |
From: Philip Newton <philip.newton@g...>
Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 4:43pm
Subject: Re: Ikonboard down (was Re: Re: standardization)
|
| |
On 10 Apr 2004 at 14:41, Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
> Philip Newton wrote:
>
> > On 10 Apr 2004 at 10:53, Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
> >
> > > Just have. Deleted the cache and tried it too. Works absolutely
> > > fine from here. Also, Paul V posted as recently as two days ago
> > > so it's obviously working for him too.
>
> Hang on, what about this? Paul V was posting to them too, so how
> come he could do it as well as me?
He either posted (a) before the move (which was on Friday) or (b)
before the new DNS information propagated through the 'net, which
could take as long as a day -- as long as "www.shavian.org" resolved to
the old server, everything was fine since the Ikonboard ran fine on
the old server (and still does, as far as I could tell).
> > It's because of the move to the new server, undoubtedly, which
> > took place on Friday. (You may still have the old IP address in
> > your ISP's DNS cache, and will probably see the same problems when
> > the cached entry expires.)
>
> Now I've just tried them and it isn't working beyond the forum index
> page. The graphics aren't loading either. Have you moved them to
> 'old.shavian.org'? It was working OK before, I'm certain.
No, I moved them from the old server to the new one :p
old.shavian.org resolves to 64.6.249.31, the IP of the old server.
(This server was known as www.shavian.org until Friday, when I changed
the name servers to Scott's.)
> > The "can't open for reading" I "fixed" by making all files world
> > writable (since it actually wanted to open the database for
> > reading *and* writing), but now it says something about an
> > "inappropriate file type or format", and I don't think I know how
> > to fix that. Do you have any idea?
>
> I've got no idea as I can't see the problem. I'm not hosting it so I
> can't access it.
Do you have an SSH (secure shell) client? Then you should be able to
connect to the machine (ask Scott for a login).
> To make this whole thing simpler I might as well just host them at
> my webspace - mixsynth.fearfulsilence.com. I have 25MB space with
> room for enlargement, it supports CGI and other extensions, and a
> good friend of mine owns the domain. All I'd need to do is copy all
> the files to my area, change a few URLs within some files, and then
> set appropriate file permissions.
I don't mind either way - now that I've moved to Scott's server I'll
gladly keep hosting the Ikonboard, but I don't know how to set it up.
I also haven't used it all that much, so I'll leave the decision up to
the others - would you rather keep it on the shavian.org domain or
move it to Hugh's space? (Assuming Hugh and/or I can get it working
again on shavian.org.)
> > Again, for the time being, you may be able to use
> > http://old.shavian.org/hugh/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi instead (as
> > soon as you can see those DNS entries, that is).
>
> No, I can't, yet.
If old.shavian.org doesn't resolve for you yet, then you should be
able to use www.shavian.org since it should resolve to the old server
as well.
I expect www.shavian.org to point to the new server tomorrow at the
latest (the previous name servers had a Time To Live of 86400 seconds
= one day).
But if www.shavian.org shows you a broken Ikonboard, then I'd expect
old.shavian.org to work for you. Tell me if
http://64.6.249.31/hugh/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi works for you (with IP
address of the old server).
> Get back to me if you want me to host the forums now. I've been able
> to for a few months now and I'm sure I mentioned it earlier...
I think it would be nice to host them on shavian.org, but if getting
them running there proves to be a problem, then you can move them
elsewhere.
Hugh, do you have an instant messenger program? Maybe Scott, you, and
I can coordinate things so that you can set things up on the new
machine. I would like things to work out that way.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@g...>
|
|
| 3050 |
From: Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@f...>
Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 4:59pm
Subject: Re: Ikonboard down (was Re: Re: standardization)
|
| |
Philip wrote:
> Hugh, do you have an instant messenger program? Maybe Scott, you, and
> I can coordinate things so that you can set things up on the new
> machine. I would like things to work out that way.
MSN / Windows Messenger: mixsynth AT fearfulsilence DOT com (paranoia about
spam...)
Yahoo! Messenger: mixsynth
AOL: mixsynth2
ICQ: 17473487
Hugh B
|
|
| 3051 |
From: Ethan <ethanl@3...>
Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 5:11am
Subject: Re: Re: standardization
|
| |
Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
> Ethan wrote:
>
>
>>Sure thing. Here's what I got:
>>
>>***Begin Error Message***
>>
>>Ikonboard CGI Error Ikonboard has exited with the following error:
>>
>>Can't open file
>>(/your/path/to/hugh/ikonboard/Database/active_sessions/active_sessions.db)
>>for reading. Permission denied
>>
>>This error was reported at: Sources/iDatabase/Driver/DBM.pm line 246.
>>
>>Please note that your 'real' paths have been removed to protect your
>>information.
>>
>>***End Error Message***
>>
>>Hugh, try reloading the page. It may be you're getting a working page
>>out of your cache, rather than the current page, which appears to have a
>>problem.
>
>
> Just have. Deleted the cache and tried it too. Works absolutely fine from
> here. Also, Paul V posted as recently as two days ago so it's obviously
> working for him too.
>
> Maybe it's because the forums don't like the browser or OS you're using? I
> can't think why they wouldn't...
>
>
>>·ð‘°ð‘”ð‘©ð‘¯ - Ethan
>
>
> ·ð‘£ð‘¿ ·𑚠- Hugh B (still can't see those letters)
And I can read your signature just fine!
Try this page: http://www.i18nguy.com/surrogates.html and see if you can
find anything helpful there for getting Windows to work right with
Shavian characters.
[Same thing repeated in Shavian - test material:]
𑯠𑲠ð‘’ð‘©ð‘¯ ð‘®ð‘°ð‘› ð‘˜ð‘¹ ð‘•ð‘¦ð‘œð‘¯ð‘©ð‘—𑼠ð‘¡ð‘³ð‘•ð‘‘ ð‘“ð‘²ð‘¯!
ð‘‘ð‘®ð‘² ð‘žð‘¦ð‘• ð‘ð‘±ð‘¡: http://www.i18nguy.com/surrogates.html 𑯠ð‘•ð‘°
ð‘¦ð‘“ ð‘¿ ð‘’ð‘©ð‘¯ ð‘“ð‘²ð‘¯ð‘›
ð‘¨ð‘¯ð‘°ð‘”ð‘¦ð‘™ ð‘£ð‘§ð‘¤ð‘ð‘“ð‘©ð‘¤ ð‘žð‘º ð‘“ð‘¹
ð‘œð‘§ð‘‘ð‘¦ð‘™ ·ð‘¢ð‘¦ð‘¯ð‘›ð‘´ð‘Ÿ ð‘‘ ð‘¢ð‘»ð‘’
ð‘®ð‘²ð‘‘ ð‘¢ð‘¦ð‘” ·ð‘–ð‘±ð‘ð‘¾ð‘¯ ð‘’ð‘ºð‘©ð‘’ð‘‘ð‘¼ð‘Ÿ.
--
·ð‘°ð‘”ð‘©ð‘¯ - Ethan
|
|
| 3052 |
From: paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink@s...>
Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 5:24am
Subject: Standard English Accent/Dictionary Choice
|
| |
Hi Hugh & Joe
I guess I liked what Joe wrote, good point. That the standard Shavian
Alphabet spelling need not match up exactly with any existing English
accent. It just needs to consistent and comprehensible by all the
major English accents.
Actually, Hugh is saying the same thing by suggesting the use of the
AHD pronunciation scheme as a standard, because I rather doubt that
anyone speaks it, if it is in fact a neutral pronunciation.
So why not have a Shavian accent, a compromise between BBC and
CBC/ABC/NBC/CBS pronunciation.
To me this suggests that we should take the AHD, eliminate as much
complication as possible, derive a simplified pronunciation by
eliminating excess phonemes (Rarely used Phonemes).
I can think of 3 Phonemes right of the bat, that I could live without.
Perhaps they could be collapsed into other Phonemes.
And then we can provide a Shavian Dictionary. People need not be held
to the new standard, unless they wanted to universalize their work
for worldwide distribution. Then they could run their written stuff
through a Shavian spelling checker to convert it to the Shavian
standard pronunciation.
If the standard was significantly easier to learn, it might even
become popular with foreighn English language learners.
____________attached_________________________________________
--- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "Hugh Birkenhead" <mixsynth@f...>
wrote:
> Joe wrote:
I just want to clarify something: I don't think it's about
representing the majority or anybody else. It's about choosing the
accent that is most comprehensible.
It doesn't have to be anybody's accent, as long as the majority (or
preferably everybody) can understand it.
Widely understandable, not widely representative.
>Hugh wrote:
One way or another the choice is too great.
So *why not* the AHD? Is it just too similar to Shavian, too
comprehensible, too phonemic,
too neutral and too easy to access?
Regards, Paul V.
P.S. So what do you think?
|
|
| 3053 |
From: Joe <allegrox_2000@y...>
Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:44pm
Subject: Re: standardization
|
| |
I'm using Safari in Mac OS X, and they don't show up right here, either. B=
ut then
when I reply, they show up fine. It doesn't work right in IE, either. Whe=
n I set the
character set to Unicode, it shows the right number of characters, but they=
're just
boxes. I haven't tried Netscape, though. Anybody have any ideas?
Regards,
Joe
·ð`¡ð`´
--- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, Ethan <ethanl@3...> wrote:
> And I can read your signature just fine!
>
> Try this page: http://www.i18nguy.com/surrogates.html and see if you can =
> find anything helpful there for getting Windows to work right with
> Shavian characters.
>
> [Same thing repeated in Shavian - test material:]
>
> ð`¯ ð`² ð`'ð`©ð`¯ ð`®ð`°ð`› ð`˜ð`¹ ð`•ð`¦ð`œð`¯ð`©ð`—ð`¼=
ð`¡ð`³ð`•ð`` ð`"ð`²ð`¯!
>
> ð``ð`®ð`² ð`žð`¦ð`• ð`ð`±ð`¡: http://www.i18nguy.com/surrogates=
.html ð`¯ ð`•ð`°
> ð`¦ð`" ð`¿ ð`'ð`©ð`¯ ð`"ð`²ð`¯ð`›
> ð`¨ð`¯ð`°ð`"ð`¦ð`™ ð`£ð`§ð`¤ð`ð`"ð`©ð`¤ ð`žð`º ð`"ð`¹ ð=
`œð`§ð``ð`¦ð`™ ·ð`¢ð`¦ð`¯ð`›ð`´ð`Ÿ ð`` ð`¢ð`»ð`'
> ð`®ð`²ð`` ð`¢ð`¦ð`" ·ð`–ð`±ð`ð`¾ð`¯ ð`'ð`ºð`©ð`'ð``ð`¼=
ð`Ÿ.
>
> --
> ·ð`°ð`"ð`©ð`¯ - Ethan
|
|
| 3054 |
From: Joe <allegrox_2000@y...>
Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:56pm
Subject: Re: Standard English Accent/Dictionary Choice
|
| |
--- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink" <pvandenbrink@s...> wrote:
> Actually, Hugh is saying the same thing by suggesting the use of the
> AHD pronunciation scheme as a standard, because I rather doubt that
> anyone speaks it, if it is in fact a neutral pronunciation.
Exactly.
> So why not have a Shavian accent, a compromise between BBC and
> CBC/ABC/NBC/CBS pronunciation.
> To me this suggests that we should take the AHD, eliminate as much
> complication as possible, derive a simplified pronunciation by
> eliminating excess phonemes (Rarely used Phonemes).
> I can think of 3 Phonemes right of the bat, that I could live without.
> Perhaps they could be collapsed into other Phonemes.
I don't think we really need to merge phonemes. I think for it to be maximally
comprehensible, we need as many distinctions as we can get, and readers who don't
know the difference will just gloss over them. But what phonemes in particular are
you talking about?
> And then we can provide a Shavian Dictionary. People need not be held
> to the new standard, unless they wanted to universalize their work
> for worldwide distribution. Then they could run their written stuff
> through a Shavian spelling checker to convert it to the Shavian
> standard pronunciation.
> If the standard was significantly easier to learn, it might even
> become popular with foreighn English language learners.
You do have a good point there. A standard should ideally be easy to learn.
|
|
| 3055 |
From: animal_liberation2004 <animal_liberation2004@y...>
Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 5:13pm
Subject: About Shavian
|
| |
Hey I'm new to Shavian and I have some questions.
What about words that sound the same but have different meanings?
Like meet and meat. How would you represent them?
|
|
| 3056 |
From: animal_liberation2004 <animal_liberation2004@y...>
Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 5:15pm
Subject: The future of shavian
|
| |
Is there any future to shavian? Is it becoming a dying writing system
or do you think it will be used in the future?
|
|
| 3057 |
From: Philip Newton <philip.newton@g...>
Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 5:23pm
Subject: Re: About Shavian
|
| |
On 12 Apr 2004 at 16:13, animal_liberation2004 wrote:
> Hey I'm new to Shavian and I have some questions.
> What about words that sound the same but have different meanings?
> Like meet and meat. How would you represent them?
The same way: mIt. Just like it treats pen "writing implement" and pen
"enclosure for keeping animals", which are spelled the same way in
Traditional Orthography already despite their different meanings.
If it sounds different, it'll be spelt differently; if it sounds the
same, it'll be spelled the same way.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <Philip.Newton@g...>
|
|
| 3058 |
From: j_brg <stetsdigs@h...>
Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:04pm
Subject: Re: The future of shavian
|
| |
--- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "animal_liberation2004"
<animal_liberation2004@y...> wrote:
> Is there any future to shavian? Is it becoming a dying writing
system
> or do you think it will be used in the future?
What do you think?
You must have seen something in shavian that moved you enough to come
here and enquire about it. I think most people would be at least
interested in it, and some would even take it up - if they knew about
it.
There was alot more publicity when it was first published in the
early sixties, but unfortunately there were also great technical
problems that were considered insurmountable. Now, with great will,
many of these former problems have and will be overcome.
But not one us has been able to generate the sort of publicity needed
bring people to shavian, nor the 'easy access' gateway (that
beginners like you must surely desire) that brings shavian to people.
I dare say that you came upon shavian quite by accident and had to
collect information/fonts/texts from manifold and sundry locations.
For every one like you, there may be ten others who gave up looking.
Thanks
Joseph
|
|
| 3059 |
From: Hugh Birkenhead <mixsynth@f...>
Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:29pm
Subject: Re: The future of shavian
|
| |
animal_liberation2004 wrote:
> Is there any future to shavian? Is it becoming a dying writing system
> or do you think it will be used in the future?
Hi there, good to see someone else has stumbled across this place.
Personally I don't think it's ever going to replace our current alphabet
completely. That doesn't mean it can't be used for anything though. People
will find their own uses for it. Hopefully it'll be used in futuristic
movies, etc, and that will raise awareness. Maybe even for education to some
extent.
It's not dying though - I'm sure there's more interest in it now than ever
before - interest can only grow from here on.
Hugh B
|
|
| 3060 |
From: Joe <allegrox_2000@y...>
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:14am
Subject: Re: The future of shavian
|
| |
--- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "animal_liberation2004"
<animal_liberation2004@y...> wrote:
> Is there any future to shavian? Is it becoming a dying writing system
> or do you think it will be used in the future?
There's definitely a future for Shavian. There's no way it could entirely r=
eplace Roman.
The Roman alphabet, like the others that have come before it, will live its=
mark on our
language. But Shavian is definitely not dying. It's only growing. I thin=
k it's just a
matter of time before it becomes known and used by most English-speakers, e=
ven if
it has to share a place with Roman.
We can help it by spreading the word. Tell people about. Most will probab=
ly be
interested in it, even if they don't really want to learn it. I found this=
group
completely by accident as I was looking for Shavian fonts, and I didn't eve=
n know
about Shavian until I stumbled onto it on www.omniglot.com. There are prob=
ably a
lot of other people who would be interested if they knew about it.
So, my answers to your questions may be a bit long-winded, but basically wh=
at I'm
saying is that it has whatever future we make for it. That in mind . . .
----Begin Shameless Plug----
You can spread the word about Shavian by wearing it on shirts and other app=
arel!
See http://www.cafeshops.com/shawstudio for details.
----End Shameless Plug----
Sorry, I couldn't help it. I promise I won't do that again.
Joe
·????
|
|
| 3061 |
From: Ethan <ethanl@3...>
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:15am
Subject: Re: Re: standardization
|
| |
Joe wrote:
> I'm using Safari in Mac OS X, and they don't show up right here, either. B=
> ut then
> when I reply, they show up fine. It doesn't work right in IE, either. Whe=
> n I set the
> character set to Unicode, it shows the right number of characters, but they=
> 're just
> boxes. I haven't tried Netscape, though. Anybody have any ideas?
>
> Regards,
> Joe
> ·ðÂ`¡ðÂ`´
Do you have a unicode font with Shavian characters installed, i.e. ESL
Gothic Unicode or Andagii? Do you have your email program set to use
one of those fonts for Unicode? Are the fonts usable on your system,
for example can you see them properly in a word processor? Do you have
your text encoding set to UTF-8 by default, both for viewing and for
composing? The message above (which I'm responding to) was encoded on
your system as ISO-8859-1, rather than UTF-8, thus the scrambled text.
--
·ð‘°ð‘”ð‘©ð‘¯ - Ethan
|
|
| 3062 |
From: Ethan <ethanl@3...>
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:25am
Subject: Re: The future of shavian
|
| |
animal_liberation2004 wrote:
> Is there any future to shavian? Is it becoming a dying writing system
> or do you think it will be used in the future?
Personally I only see it increasing in its future use. As more people
learn about it, we can expect to see more people adopting it. Also, my
experience has been that children who see it are very interested in it,
and the mass adoption of Shavian might be possible if enough children
learn it.
For the most part, Shavian just needs exposure. It isn't dying, it's
just that not very many people have ever even heard of it - it's very
young and is growing slowly at first. Remember, Shavian has existed
only fifty-some years, while the Roman alphabet has seen over two
millennia of use!
--
·ð‘°ð‘”ð‘©ð‘¯ - Ethan
|
|
| 3063 |
From: Star Raven <celestraof12worlds@y...>
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 0:22pm
Subject: Re: About Shavian
|
| |
Shavian is not about meaning... you have to distinguish these on your
own. Would you hear them the same when spoken?
--Star
--- animal_liberation2004 <animal_liberation2004@y...> wrote:
> Hey I'm new to Shavian and I have some questions.
> What about words that sound the same but have different meanings?
> Like meet and meat. How would you represent them?
>
>
>
=====
Why is it always me and the burning death?
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/
|
|
| 3064 |
From: Star Raven <celestraof12worlds@y...>
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 0:26pm
Subject: Re: The future of shavian
|
| |
Hugh,
Hey, if klingon and tenktonese (sp?) can make it to omniglot...
--Star
> Personally I don't think it's ever going to replace our current
> alphabet
> completely. That doesn't mean it can't be used for anything though.
> People
> will find their own uses for it. Hopefully it'll be used in
> futuristic
> movies, etc, and that will raise awareness. Maybe even for education
> to some
> extent.
=====
Why is it always me and the burning death?
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/
|
|
| 3065 |
From: animal_liberation2004 <animal_liberation2004@y...>
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:24pm
Subject: A Question about Shavian pronounciation
|
| |
What about the common one-letter word "a" as in "I have a house".
Would "a" be pronounced like ay or uh.
Anyway to change the subject I think there is a possibility that
Shavian will grow and yes i agree it all depends on us to spread the
word. I am new to Shavian and have only been studying it for several
days but I am already a little good at writing and somewhat at
reading. It takes me forever to read in Shavian because I have to
translate the shavian in my mind but hopefully I will read Shavian
with greater ease and speed.
|
|
| 3066 |
From: j_brg <stetsdigs@h...>
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:14pm
Subject: Re: A Question about Shavian pronounciation
|
| |
--- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "animal_liberation2004"
<animal_liberation2004@y...> wrote:
> What about the common one-letter word "a" as in "I have a house".
> Would "a" be pronounced like ay or uh.
I can be either one or the other depending on the stress in that
sentence. I, personally, always use the 'uh' (schwa) letter.
> Anyway to change the subject I think there is a possibility that
> Shavian will grow and yes i agree it all depends on us to spread the
> word. I am new to Shavian and have only been studying it for several
> days but I am already a little good at writing and somewhat at
> reading. It takes me forever to read in Shavian because I have to
> translate the shavian in my mind but hopefully I will read Shavian
> with greater ease and speed.
It does take some time to speed up when reading shavian. This is
because it isn't part of your everyday routine and reading roman
script is more ingrained.
Thanks
Joseph
|
|
| 3067 |
From: Scott Harrison <scott@m...>
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:48pm
Subject: Re: A Question about Shavian pronounciation
|
| |
On Apr 13, 2004, at 09:24, animal_liberation2004 wrote:
> What about the common one-letter word "a" as in "I have a house".
> Would "a" be pronounced like ay or uh.
>
Androcles and the Lion indicates that to be consistent one should
always use "uh" (the ado character) for the word "a."
--
Scott Harrison PGP Key ID: 0x0f0b5b86
|
|
| 3068 |
From: Star Raven <celestraof12worlds@y...>
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:34pm
Subject: Re: Re: A Question about Shavian pronounciation
|
| |
--- j_brg <stetsdigs@h...> wrote:
> --- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "animal_liberation2004"
> <animal_liberation2004@y...> wrote:
> > What about the common one-letter word "a" as in "I have a house".
> > Would "a" be pronounced like ay or uh.
>
> I can be either one or the other depending on the stress in that
> sentence. I, personally, always use the 'uh' (schwa) letter.
>
If there is a poetic reason for it, or if (schwa) does not sound right,
then I will use /age/ but that's about the only time.
--Star
=====
Why is it always me and the burning death?
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
|
|
| 3069 |
From: Joe <allegrox_2000@y...>
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 10:24pm
Subject: Re: standardization
|
| |
--- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, Ethan <ethanl@3...> wrote:
> Do you have a unicode font with Shavian characters installed, i.e. ESL
> Gothic Unicode or Andagii? Do you have your email program set to use
> one of those fonts for Unicode? Are the fonts usable on your system,
> for example can you see them properly in a word processor? Do you have
> your text encoding set to UTF-8 by default, both for viewing and for
> composing? The message above (which I'm responding to) was encoded on
> your system as ISO-8859-1, rather than UTF-8, thus the scrambled text.
>
> --
> ·ð`°ð`"ð`©ð`¯ - Ethan
Well, I'm just on the group page using Yahoo's form to send the emails, so =
I think it's
an issue with Yahoo. I have both fonts, and both work fairly well. I have=
noticed
some minor problems when using Unicode Shavian, like programs crashing, or =
my
browser not letting me upload a file stored in a directory with a name in S=
havian.
But I can read your name, so I think the problem Yahoo's form changing the =
encoding.
-Joe
|
|
| 3070 |
From: Joe <allegrox_2000@y...>
Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 10:33pm
Subject: Re: A Question about Shavian pronounciation
|
| |
--- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "j_brg" <stetsdigs@h...> wrote:
> I can be either one or the other depending on the stress in that
> sentence. I, personally, always use the 'uh' (schwa) letter.
I think the introduction to Androcles and the Lion also said that the letter "ado" (the
schwa) is also use in "an", but I always use "ash".
> It does take some time to speed up when reading shavian. This is
> because it isn't part of your everyday routine and reading roman
> script is more ingrained.
I've probably been using shavian for a couple years now (I can't even remember how
long it's been), and I'm still a slow reader. It can take quite a while. Of course, I'm a
slow reader, anyway. But I'm getting better, and so will you.
|
|
| 3071 |
From: paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink@s...>
Date: Wed Apr 14, 2004 2:44am
Subject: Re: Standard English Accent/Dictionary Choice
|
| |
--- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" <allegrox_2000@y...> wrote:
> --- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink"
<pvandenbrink@s...> wrote:
> > To me this suggests that we should take the AHD, eliminate as
much
> > complication as possible, derive a simplified pronunciation by
> > eliminating excess phonemes (Rarely used Phonemes).
> > I can think of 3 Phonemes right of the bat, that I could live
without.
> > Perhaps they could be collapsed into other Phonemes.
>
> I don't think we really need to merge phonemes. I think for it to
be maximally
> comprehensible, we need as many distinctions as we can get, and
readers who don't
> know the difference will just gloss over them. But what phonemes
in particular are
> you talking about?
|
|
| 3072 |
From: paul vandenbrink <pvandenbrink@s...>
Date: Wed Apr 14, 2004 3:35am
Subject: Standard English Phonemes for Shavian
|
| |
Hi Joe
Sorry, but the first time I sent you a response to your question it
dropped my answer.
So in response to your question:
>But what phonemes
> in particular are
> > you talking about?
I am just going to describe with what I would consider to be an ideal
set of Phonemes for English written in Shavian. I am using the ones
listed
in the A.H.D.L.E Dictionary Pronunciation Key as a starting point.
Hugh B. provided us with an on-line copy.
First. realize that wh and w in the AHD Dictionary are already
collapsed into the Shaw Letter Woe.
And there is no equivalent to the Shaw Letters Yew and Ian.
I would like to collapse the a with the umlat (father) and the soft o
(got) into the Shaw Letter Ahms.
I would like to also collapse the schwar (butter) and ur (term) into
the Shaw letter Array.
Finally, I would like to collapse the letter u and the letter schwa
into the Shaw letter Up.
I think the letter Ado should actally be reserved to indicate
consonants which are complete syllables in themselves.
For example, the l in girl and rattle, the m in bottom, and the n in
sudden and rotten.
This is because I believe every syllable should have a distinct vowel
letter when written, not to rely on an implicit or hidden vowel.
Regards, Paul V.
P.S. Realize this does make the Shaw letters On and Err extraneous.
Final result would be a more effective Shaw Alphabet of 44 letters.
___________________attached____________________________
--- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink"
<pvandenbrink@s...> wrote:
> --- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" <allegrox_2000@y...> wrote:
> > --- In shavian@yahoogroups.com, "paul vandenbrink"
> <pvandenbrink@s...> wrote:
> > > To me this suggests that we should take the AHD, eliminate as
> much
> > > complication as possible, derive a simplified pronunciation by
> > > eliminating excess phonemes (Rarely used Phonemes).
> > > I can think of 3 Phonemes right of the bat, that I could live
> without.
> > > Perhaps they could be collapsed into other Phonemes.
> >
> > I don't think we really need to merge phonemes. I think for it
to
> be maximally
> > comprehensible, we need as many distinctions as we can get, and
> readers who don't
> > know the difference will just gloss over them. But what phonemes
> in particular are
> > you talking about?
|
|
|
|
Yahoo! Sponsored Links
|
Acclaimed Writing Classes:
NYC's renowned Gotham Writers' Workshop offers classes online and in
NYC in writing fiction, screenplays, memoir, poetry, nonfiction, and
more. Selected "Best of the Web" by Forbes.
www.writingclasses.com
Brainco Writing School:
Getting a career in the advertising industry? Brainco offers programs
in art direction, branding, account management, interactive writing and
other subject areas. Located in Minneapolis, MN.
www.brainco.org
Story Development Software:
Wide selection of products for novelists and screenwriters. Download demos. Free bonuses with any order.
storymind.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
= Owner
= Moderator
= Online