<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: seeking advice</title></head><body>
<div>Hello:</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I see that there have been questions about what the
"American transcription" system is. I was interpreting it to
mean the use of some alternate phonetic symbols - specifically
s-hachek for IPA long s, z-hacheck for Z (affricate), c-hachek and
j-hachek for the affricates; y to mean a palatal glide (vs. IPA /j/)
and u-umlaut to mean front-rounded vowel (vs. IPA /y/) and o-umlaut to
mean mid front-rounded vowel (vs. IPA o-slash); t-dot/d-dot to
represent retroflex stops; n-tilde to represent palatal n. This system
is used in some phonology textbooks such as "Phonology in
Generative Grammar" by Michael Kenstowicz.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Although it is not pure IPA, it is a valid transcription system
used by practicing phonologists, particularly those studying Native
American languages.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I have no opinion on wheter to use IPA or a modified
transcription system, although I agree consistency is important.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Furthermore, there is no reason to contribute to the general
perception that Americans just can't handle phonetic symbols, a
perception that is reinforced by the fact that American dictionary
makers, and only they, refuse to use IPA for pronunciation
guides.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I think this refers to the practice of Websters and other
American dictionaries of using "cheesy" phonetic spelling as
in "long i" to represent the /ay/ or /aj/ diphthong. I also
consider this to be inane and very irritating. I hope that's not what
the publisher wants.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I also concur that Americans can cope with British spellings,
although it may be a standard publish practice to translate items into
an American edition. For instance, my Handbook of the IPA, printed in
the UK by a British company (Cambridge University Press) is using the
American spelling (I did buy it in the US, so maybe it's a special
print run just for us).</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>So at this point, I would like to add a plea for my cheerfully
oblivious fellow citizens that if we have been exposed to American
editions of textbooks, it may be out of our control. </div>
<div><br></div>
<div>However, I have never heard anyone strenuously object to the
existence of British/Canadian spelling or seriously say that they
cannot read it. We just have to special order the books if we want to
see them in UK spelling (and some people do just that).</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Cheers</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Elizabeth Pyatt</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div><br>
On the other hand, some transcription traditions are older than IPA,
and I think it would look really funny transcribing Sanskrit palatal
glides with [j] and the postalveolar affricate with a [dZ]. Do
we really want to write 'joga' and 'radZa'? Sorry, but even
German-speaking linguists write Sanskrit with 'y'.<br>
<br>
Geoff Nathan<br>
</div>
<div>Geoffrey S. Nathan <geoffnathan@wayne.edu></div>
<div>Faculty Liaison, Computing and Information Technology,</div>
<div>Wayne State University</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Linguistics Program</div>
<div>(snailmail)</div>
<div>Department of English</div>
<div>Wayne State University</div>
<div>Detroit, MI, 48202</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Phone Numbers</div>
<div>Computing and Information Technology: (313) 577-1259</div>
<div>Linguistics (English): (313) 577-8621</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<x-sigsep><pre>--
</pre></x-sigsep>
<div>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<br>
Elizabeth J. Pyatt, Ph.D.<br>
Instructional Designer<br>
Education Technology Services, TLT<br>
Penn State University<br>
ejp10@psu.edu, (814) 865-0805<br>
<br>
228A Computer Building<br>
University Park, PA 16801<br>
http://www.personal.psu.edu/ejp10<br>
http://tlt.psu.edu</div>
</body>
</html>