There are 7 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: OT: Dvorak (Was: Re: OE diphthongs/breaking (was: Re: Germanic v
From: Amanda Babcock Furrow
1b. Re: OT: Dvorak (Was: Re: OE diphthongs/breaking (was: Re: Germanic v
From: Jean-François Colson
2.1. Re: Germanic vowel correspondences (was: Scots.)
From: John Vertical
2.2. Re: Germanic vowel correspondences (was: Scots.)
From: Philip Newton
3a. Re: OT: Dvorak
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
3b. Re: OT: Dvorak
From: Mark J. Reed
3c. Re: OT: Dvorak
From: Lars Finsen
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: OT: Dvorak (Was: Re: OE diphthongs/breaking (was: Re: Germanic v
Posted by: "Amanda Babcock Furrow" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:08 pm ((PDT))
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:25:15AM +0200, René Uittenbogaard wrote:
> Which makes me curious... How many people are there on this list that
> use Dvorak? I do.
*raises hand* Yo.
When I used a BSD system I mapped to Dvorak in X. On Windows, I have the
Dvorak as a default, but I have to switch to the (QUERTY) US-International
when it comes time to make diacritics.
tylakèhlpë'fö,
Amanda
Messages in this topic (11)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: OT: Dvorak (Was: Re: OE diphthongs/breaking (was: Re: Germanic v
Posted by: "Jean-François Colson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:26 am ((PDT))
Amanda Babcock Furrow wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:25:15AM +0200, René Uittenbogaard wrote:
>
>> Which makes me curious... How many people are there on this list that
>> use Dvorak? I do.
>
> *raises hand* Yo.
>
> When I used a BSD system I mapped to Dvorak in X. On Windows, I have the
> Dvorak as a default, but I have to switch to the (QUERTY) US-International
> when it comes time to make diacritics.
>
Why don't you make a Dvorak-International ?
I personally don't use a Dvorak keyboard, but I often type in bépo (a
Dvorak-like layout for French) : www.clavier-dvorak.org
JF
Messages in this topic (11)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2.1. Re: Germanic vowel correspondences (was: Scots.)
Posted by: "John Vertical" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 5:41 am ((PDT))
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 23:42:24 +1000, Tristan McLeay wrote:
>Do you do something to words like "either" and "ceiling" or are you
>declaring that "ei" is permitted to be ambiguous?
Not thus far... "Either" is impossible to standardize anyway, and it seems to
me
that it's not entirely random what's going on elsewhere (eg . /eI/ when final
stressed, /i/ when final unstressed); but I've yet to settle on anything. The
three wholly aberrant cases of <ea> = /eI/ are OTOH quick to do away, and I
think <ei> conveys a conscious decision somewhat better than <ai>/<ay>, at
least much better than the homograph-producing <a_e>. It's more accurate
from a phonetic viewpoint, too...
<ear> = /Er/ is a different case tho; here the status quo looks the least ugly
to my eyes.
BTW the point in all this respelling isn't as much creating a different
standard
as it is to braque ;) out of the idea that even when the system allows for
multiple spellings per pronunciation, only one may be accepted.
>Well ... okay so Australian English probably never had [au ai], it
>has [a a:] (i.e. central qualities) and it doesn't have [A A:] (i.e.
>back qualities). There is apparently evidence that from [EMAIL PROTECTED] @i]
>in some
>dialects the first target went straight down, whereas in others it
>continued in the direction that makes the diphthong the greatest ...
The nucleus height, or what AUsEng looks like today, are hardly relevant for
this... but basically, you're trying to say that this kind of a change SHOULD
be
expected? Okay, I can think of one argument for that; when there are back
and front open vowels recognized, it will be possible to hear a backness
difference in [au ai] (or [6u 6i], or whatever) that would not be there for [Au
&i]... so they're prone to get interpreted as /&/+/u/ and /A/+/i/, rather than
vice versa. Sound good so far? Examples of /au ai/ > /o: e:/ seem to be found
mostly in languages with only /a/.
So we have a hypothesis, but now, where else do they have languages
distinguishing /& A/ (vowel harmony langs aside)? At least Persia and Tibet, I
think... neither seems to have been home to any shifts of this sort recently,
however.
>An unconditional u > y change is a pretty common one.
ZBB's sound changes thred includes an example of unconditional o > i from
some Algonquian language, I suspect something similar there too BTW.
>And just because Australia and North America aren't part of western or
>central Eurasia doesn't mean they can't've been influenced by speech
>forms in that area as much as any language. Mandarin has /y/ and
>accounts for a large proportion of the EFL speakers in Australia today
>(although the change probably predates them). Germans and Scandinavians
>apparently made up a large proportion of immigrants to America in the
>past.
This is a point, too. How about we'll only call it weird if they then hang
along
for the next 200 years? ;)
John Vertical
Messages in this topic (28)
________________________________________________________________________
2.2. Re: Germanic vowel correspondences (was: Scots.)
Posted by: "Philip Newton" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 5:54 am ((PDT))
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 14:41, John Vertical <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <ear> = /Er/ is a different case tho
I don't think that's a pronunciation I've ever come across. (Were you
thinking of "ere", which I've heard pronounced both /Er/ and /Ir/? Or
<ear> = /Ir/? Or something else?)
Cheers,
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Messages in this topic (28)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: OT: Dvorak
Posted by: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:49 am ((PDT))
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark J. Reed
> > I tried it about 25+ years ago. I'm in I.T. where I'm forced to
> > use a lot of different computers so Dvorak isn't practical for
> > me. I really don't type fast enough for it to be a major
> > benefit anyway. Only about 35-40 WPM.
> I'm in the same boat, except I type a tad faster than that on qwerty -
> 90+ wpm. I'm kinda surprised your typing speed isn't higher, given
> that you're in IT. Just keeping up with my work email is plenty of
> typing practice. :)
The need to use a )(#*$*'ed mouse has slowed down typing a lot. I hate
switching back and forth between the two. I'd much prefer to run on a
mouseless platform.
Getting somewhat OT here, but after working in Georgia for the last few weeks,
I'm trying to figure out why a lot of the road signs there have undotted <i>'s.
Messages in this topic (11)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: OT: Dvorak
Posted by: "Mark J. Reed" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:25 am ((PDT))
Ah yes. My mousing is minimal. ClI guy.
Hadn't noticed any dotless I's. What types of sign, in what part of
the state? I'm looking at a sign for "Hawkins Store Rd" and the I is
definitely dotted.
On 7/25/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark J. Reed
>
>> > I tried it about 25+ years ago. I'm in I.T. where I'm forced to
>> > use a lot of different computers so Dvorak isn't practical for
>> > me. I really don't type fast enough for it to be a major
>> > benefit anyway. Only about 35-40 WPM.
>
>> I'm in the same boat, except I type a tad faster than that on qwerty -
>> 90+ wpm. I'm kinda surprised your typing speed isn't higher, given
>> that you're in IT. Just keeping up with my work email is plenty of
>> typing practice. :)
>
> The need to use a )(#*$*'ed mouse has slowed down typing a lot. I hate
> switching back and forth between the two. I'd much prefer to run on a
> mouseless platform.
>
>
> Getting somewhat OT here, but after working in Georgia for the last few
> weeks, I'm trying to figure out why a lot of the road signs there have
> undotted <i>'s.
>
--
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Messages in this topic (11)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: OT: Dvorak
Posted by: "Lars Finsen" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:30 am ((PDT))
Den 25. jul. 2008 kl. 19.45 skreiv [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> Getting somewhat OT here, but after working in Georgia for the last
> few weeks, I'm trying to figure out why a lot of the road signs
> there have undotted <i>'s.
I thought they had a whole alphabet of their own - pretty one, too.
Isn't the Dvorak designed to type fast for longer periods at a time,
rather than actually increasing the top typing speed? Anyway I don't
think it would do any good for me, because my self-taught typing
technique allows one hand to make forays into the other hand's half
of the keyboard whenever it feels idle. I believe it enhances my speed.
LEF
Messages in this topic (11)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
