LL-L "Orthography" 2002.03.04 (05) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 04.MAR.2002 (05) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 Rules: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/rules.html>
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Server Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

From: Sandy Fleming [sandy at scotstext.org]
Subject: "Orthography"

> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Orthography
>
> > That's a strange thing I noticed: the heavily diacritical
> > version is particularly easy to read - such a pity that
> > it's harder to type! If it could be typed easily then I'd
> > much prefer it to the diacritic-free version.
>
> I think the reason for greater ease of reading is that decoding digraphs
> (unless they are double letters for length) is harder on the old brain,
> and diacritics allow of preserving the visual grapheme-based
> relationships between allographs.

I read in New Scientist some time ago about research where
they showed that in reading an Italian text a person uses
completely different areas of their brain than in reading
an English text, so you may be right. I thought it was a
pity they didn't try more languges, though.

I've been practising writing the diacritic form of the
orthography and it certainly seems easier to write than
non-diacritic stuff - in spite of the diacritics there
are far fewer letters, which helps a lot!

The more I write it the more I think it would be better
just to ignore vowel length - it rarely arises outside
of vowels that are already always long, or where the
SVLR wouldn't indicate it anyway.

If I were to adopt the diacritical orthography as the final
orthography, however, I'd write <uú> for /Vu/ rather than the
fudge I suggested - it would make more sense to people who
learn from this orthography (the other fudge still seems
good, though!).

> Well, for now, you might like to try doing what I do with longer texts
> in German, Low Saxon, Turkish, etc., when using an English keyboard:
> temporarily use digraphs and later convert the text with an
> inter-language-specific macro.

Works a treat!

> By the way, even if this kind of consistent orthography for Scots is not
> generally accepted (soon), it would be absolutely terrific as a teaching
> aid, namely as an auxiliary system for instance in textbooks or (given

Yes, I'm pretty sure I'm going to use this on ScotsteXt
as my "Edited" text. As well as being good for learners
(and native speakers, if they but knew it? :) it's
eminently computer-processable and could be used for all
sorts of things that I haven't been able to get to work
those irreglar texts.

> From: "Andy Eagle" <andy at scots-online.org>
> Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2002.03.01 (04) [E]
>
> My concern is, if a consistant orthography was used, would people make
> the e
> ffert to familiarize themselves with it in order to read what is peing
> presented. If only very few people bother is the effort worth it?

I think so, yes.

> Sandy Fleming wrote:
>
> ><th> /T/
> ><dh> /D/
> ><nk> /Nk/
> ><ng> /N/
> ><zh> /Z/
> ><sh> /S/
> ><ch> /tS/
> ><kh> /x/
> ><wh> /W/
>
> That's getting nearer to what we often already use.

Yeah, well, I've changed my mind about that! I think the
best thing for now is to see what can be done with the
"pure" orthography. All those substitutions are just
cosmetics and can be done any time.

> How about changing <kh> to <ch> and merging <th> an <dh> to <th> since
> native speakers will know the difference.

Not yet  :>

> Differ /a/ <a> from /Q/ <au> e.g. mat /maut. <au> is /a:/ in the north
> east.

Thanks, Andy - I've still to read the stuff you sent me,
so I'll know better how to use this when I do.

I think the thing to do is put it up on ScotsteXt for
some of the texts (there's far too many to do all of
them!), and see what happens from there.

Sandy
http://scotstext.org
A dinæ dút him, for hi séz ðat hí
On né ukúnt wad ivir tel u lí  :)
                          - C.W.Wade,
                    'The Adventures o McNab'
----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Orthography

Sandy,

> I read in New Scientist some time ago about research where
> they showed that in reading an Italian text a person uses
> completely different areas of their brain than in reading
> an English text, so you may be right. I thought it was a
> pity they didn't try more languges, though.

I vaguely remember a published study (from the 1970s, I think) that
sought to show that there were such differences between Japanese and
Westerners in reading, analytical thinking and creative/artistic
pursuits, and that the percentage of Japanese that used their brains in
the "Western" way was higher among those that lived in Hawai'i and
highest in those that lived in the continental U.S.

> Yes, I'm pretty sure I'm going to use this on ScotsteXt
> as my "Edited" text. As well as being good for learners
> (and native speakers, if they but knew it? :) it's
> eminently computer-processable and could be used for all
> sorts of things that I haven't been able to get to work
> those irreglar texts.

Yes, that's great, and it shouldn't be too much trouble, given that you
are a fellow macro meister.  As for Scots speakers, with sufficient
exposure they might just one day wake up and smell the porridge.

Good luck!
Reinhard/Ron

==================================END===================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=======================================================================
 * Please submit postings to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
   to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
=======================================================================