LL-L "Orthography" 2002.03.16 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 16.MAR.2002 (02) * 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: "John M. Tait" <jmtait at wirhoose.co.uk>
> Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2002.02.28 (07) [E]
>
> Examples of each kind:
>
> (a) The connotation of <ea> as equating to an [i] pronunciation destroys
> its value as a diaphonological (or polyphonemic) representation for BEAT
> class words. This could potentially be addressed by spelling the
> diaphoneme
> as <ae> or <ei>.
>
> (b) The diaphonological spellings of <tui> (adv = English _too_), <dui>,
> <shui> are seen as unnecessary because of (c) the lack of a tradition of
> final <ui> in Scots spelling.
>
> It would be quite possible to create an orthography which simply
> systematised these elements, while using English-type conventions of

This is easy enough to talk about, but can you actually devise
a complete orthography of this kind and can you give an extended
example to show that it can be made to work, like I did for mine?
I appreciate that not everbody has the sort of text processing
software I have, but if you pick a short story from ScotsteXt
I'll send you a wordlist for it, which you can edit to your own
orthography and send back, then I'll apply the substitutions
to the story and post it for inspection. Without some sort of
practical application like this, it's all just hot air.

> tailored to Scots. It is true that the changes to traditional spelling
> required to implement this meet with vehement resistance, but this

I'll say it again - I'm really not interested in the resistance,
at least not as far as compromising the orthography goes.

You may remember that the new orthography postings arose directly
from a discussion saying that even tiny changes to orthographic
principles will meet with huge resistance, so we'd as weel be
hanged for a sheep as a lamb.

> This type of approach is of course messy compared to a 1->1 system, but
> it
> can be made regular within its own presuppositions. So <y>, and <i> with
> following <e> after one or more consonants, both have a defined
> pronunciation, assuming that the long and short pronunciations are
> allophones except finally, where they are normally distinguished as
> <-y(e)>
> and <ey>. What should be done away with is spellings such as _mind_,
> _wind_, where there is no way to tell how the vowels are pronounced, and
> spellings like <ay> v. <aye>, which conflict with other spellings such
> as
> <kye> and <gey> and should be spelled <aye> and <ey>.

How would these suggestions you're making compare with Lorimer,
then? Do you think a study of the principles in Lorimer's
orthography would be a good start to devising the sort of
orthography you have in mind?

> Another problem with existing systems is that most people who are
> involved
> in them accept almost as if it were an axiom the idea that words that
> sound
> the same but have different meanings should be spelt differently - this
> automatically creating spellings, such as _redd_ , which break normal
> rules.

It may be that some homographic avoidance makes sense with
small, frequent words. For example, a distinction between
"as" and "is", which are almost always pronounced the same,
is possibly a good idea. Similarly, the vowel in pronouns
such as "they", "their" and "them" could be distinguished
from that in indicatives such as "thae" and "there".

But having said that, my own memories of grappling with the
difference between "there" and "their" in English at school
suggest to me that grammar distinctions aren't easy to learn
and make spelling difficult. Other examples are "who's/whose",
and "your/you're". Semantically contrasting distinctions such
as "as/is" and "pair/pare/pear" seem a lot easier to work with.

> readability for those literate in English - such as etymological
> spellings
> of Latinate and Greek words - which Andy and I would consider not so
> much
> important as inescapable. It would depend what your aims and objectives
> were.

This is still just the question of what you're used to.

> Well, I suppose I'm only speaking from my own perspective, where the
> practical purpose of any orthography is that it be accepted widely
> enough
> to assist literacy in the language. This is a tall order in any case as
> far
> as Scots is concerned, as it would require some sort of official backing

Things have changed a bit from the days of the Spelling Committee.
Now we have huge numbers of texts in Scots on public display (I'm
talking about ScotsteXt now) and the wherewithal to have them
presented in an alternative orthography of our choosing. There is
also the feeling that some things will never die, no matter how
small the following - just try searching the Web for Klingon,
Shavian, or even the Futurama alien font! There are even very
popular websites on how to devise your own alien language, some
of which I believe were written by professional linguists. If we
could get a really good orthography I would build a dictionary for
it so that the ScotsteXt texts could be converted automatically. I
could put up a service (ie an HTML form where you can paste a text
and have it transliterated automatically) and perhaps other Scots
writers and editors would use it to present their own stuff as
alternative texts on their own site. Like I said, it's not necessary
to have a large following, it would be enough to have a small
following either gradually growing or at least keeping the thing
alive so that it's there if the time ever becomes ripe (cue evil
laughter :)

Of course there would have to be some supporting site describing
the orthography, perhaps with exercises, word games &c. Perhaps
the "Orthography" appendix of my grammar pages could be used:

http://sandyfleemin.org/grammar/orthography/history.asp

But the first step is to devise the orthography, not worry about
the opposition.

I haven't answered your more detailed points as I'm still looking
at them!

Sandy
http://scotstext.org
A dinna dout him, for he says that he
On nae accoont wad ever tell a lee.
                          - C.W.Wade,
                    'The Adventures o McNab'

==================================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
=======================================================================