LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for AUXLANG Archives


AUXLANG Archives

AUXLANG Archives


AUXLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

AUXLANG Home

AUXLANG Home

AUXLANG  September 2000, Week 4

AUXLANG September 2000, Week 4

Subject:

Re: Eo's Screaming... (was Re: In/transitive

From:

"Paul O. Bartlett" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

International Auxiliary Languages <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 26 Sep 2000 21:24:44 -0400

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (39 lines)

On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Ken Caviness wrote (excerpted):

> I did. Now read again the possible solutions I listed (excerpted from a
> previous message for your convenience):

> (2) overloading letter combinations to form digraphs with sound values
> unrelated to the sounds of the individual letters (also common in
> certain ethnic languages)

    But digraphs are not always "unrelated to the sounds of the
individual letters." Consider Ido, which I am sure you are familiar
with. It uses only two digraphs, 'ch' for /tS/ and 'sh' for /S/. Is
this really such a big deal? Considering that as Latin mutated into
various dialects, 'c' as /k/ sometimes mutated phonologically into 'c'
as /ts/, which is its orthographic usage in both Esperanto and Ido and
is historically justifiable. And it does not seem a stretch to me to
believe that 'ch' as /tsh/ could mutate into /tS/ and 'sh' as /sh/ into
/S/.

    So I think that in this case, the Ido digraphs are not so
farfetched. Using a whole two -- count' em, the fantastically large
number of two -- digraphs to be learned by themselves is far, far, far
less a burden than dealing with accented letters peculiar to one
auxiliary language by itself. In such an instance, I think that by a
pragmatic judgment the digraphs are much more practical than the
supersigned letters. Why place an unnecessary obstacle in the way of
users of a language which is supposed to *facilitate* communication,
not impede it by its written form?

    Still, I am not naive enough to suppose that this debate is going
to come to a conclusion any time soon.

--
Paul mailto:[log in to unmask]
..........................................................
Paul O. Bartlett, P.O. Box 857, Vienna, VA 22183-0857, USA
Keyserver (0xF383C8F9) or WWW for PGP public key
Home Page: http://www.smart.net/~bartlett

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password