LL-L "Orthography" 2007.04.19 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

L O W L A N D S - L  -  19 April 2007 - Volume 01

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

From: "Isaac M. Davis" <isaacmacdonalddavis at gmail.com>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2007.04.17 (12) [E]

On the subject of foreword/forward confusion, Ron wrote:

Kevin, well, if you put it that way ;-) I guess they are pronounced alike in
> rhotic American English.  As far as I know, they are not in most non-rhotic
> dialects; for instance something like "foreword" ["fo:w3:d] vs "forward"
> ["fowOd] ~ ["fO:d], vs something like ["fOrw3rd] in rhotic American for
> both.  Well, right.  So it's understandable ... but ...
>

I don't know if this is just personal idiosyncrasy, but I pronounce them
differently when I'm stressing them; 'forward' receives equal stress on each
syllable, or possibly slightly more on the initial, where 'foreword' is
stressed on the ultimate. In relaxed speech, though, they are certainly
homophones.


My 2 Canadian cents, eh,

Isaac M. Davis

-- 

Westron wynd, when wilt thou blow
The smalle rain down can rain
Christ yf my love were in my arms
And I yn my bed again

----------

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2007.04.18 (04) [E]

Sandy wrote:
>Most unusually, I feel I must contradict you all   :)

>I don't think the typist-homonym phenomenon is about concentration. I
>think it's about the fact that when you write by hand, you can feel the
>shapes of the words as you write them and to write "to" when you're
>thinking "too" (fpr example) would feel quite wrong.

But how would that be contradicting me? I think exactly the same... although
sometimes lately, I've experienced strange cases where I mean to write
"table" and end up writing "clock", or some such thing, either typed or by
hand. Too much on my mind, I suppose. In these cases, even the "feel" of the
written word won't help.

And Ron:
>But I have misspelled by hand in the manner of "two" vs "two" also.

Now this one, I'm afraid, is too subtle for me... :-)

Gabriele Kahn

----------

From: Obiter Dictum <obiterdictum at mail.ru>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2007.04.18 (04) [E]

Haai almal,

Ron wrote:

> Sumth'n' to ponder pr'aps ...

Pr'aps.

Hester wrote:
> > >Has anyone on this forum noticed themselves
> > >automatically typing one homonym for another?

Do you linguistically minded guys mean _homophone_, rather? ;)

(Being a tax lawyer, and an elected judge at one time in the past,
couldn't resist it. Can't help it guys. Sorry ;) )

Now tell me: Why don't _I_ make homophonic typos in ANY of the
5 languages I type, EVEN in Japanese, known, together with Chinese,
for its homophonicity?

Yeah, to be honest, I'm butterfinger enough to select the wrong
kanji now and them--but I see and respell in hiragana and reselect
the right one right away.
Ok, then, I sometimes type absentmindedly "c" instead of "s" in a languages
that use the Latin alphabet (Russian "c" [s] and Latin "c" are on
the same button in QWERTY.). But again, I see that immediately--
without any spellchecker.

Finally, I mistype "cant" for "can't"--just like in the sentence
"Can't help it guys" above. But, since I never use "cant" in my writing,
I set my Autocorrect option to insert the apostrophe.

And that perhaps takes us to the contentious notion of
"innate/inborn/inherent literacy."

Could homophonic typos be evidence of sum't'ing... antonymic ? ;)
> Sumth'n' to ponder pr'aps ...

Recpectfully cubmitted by

Butturfingur Lee

---------

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

OK, OK, you guys!  Those were just demonstrations of how not to do it.

"two" vs "too"

"homophones"

So there!

Mr. Butterfinger ...

> Ok, then, I sometimes type absentmindedly "c" instead of "s" in a
languages
> that use the Latin alphabet (Russian "c" [s] and Latin "c" are on
> the same button in QWERTY.).

The bain of the existence of one of my Russian instructors was when
beginning students would refer to Cyrillic с (standing for /s/) as "cee."
It would send him right over the edge, which would then perpetuate the
problem.

Reinhard/Ron

P.S.: By the way, we have an ever-growing number of English teachers on this
list. One of them joined today, from Tehran, Iran. (!خوش آمدید) Exchanges of
experiences among them might be educational for the rest of us also.

----------

From: Luc Hellinckx <luc.hellinckx at gmail.com>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography"

Dear Sandy,

You wrote:

 From: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2007.04.17 (10) [E]

 > From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
> Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2007.04.17 (08) [E]
>
> Heather wrote:
> >" there are 30 copies listed for sail "
> >I cannot believe I wrote that!
>
> >Has anyone on this forum noticed themselves
> >automatically typing one homonym for another?
>
> Oh yes, this happens to me all the time. Glad I'm not the only one!
> Often I have to go through what I typed and correct all the instances
> where I wrote "to" instead of "two" or "too", for example, although I
> know exactly how it should be spelled in each instance. This never
> happens when I write by hand!
>
> Gabriele Kahn

> From: Luc Hellinckx <luc.hellinckx at gmail.com>
> Subject: LL-L "Orthography"
>
> Dear Heather,
>
> You wrote:
>
> > " there are 30 copies listed for sail "
> >
> > I cannot believe I wrote that!
>
> First stage: when I write something down on a piece of paper, my head
> is slightly tilted forward, same position as when I'm reading a book.
> I find this to be the best position for concentration, it allows me to
> focus well.

> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Orthography
>
> What we're talking about here is a matter of concentration or the lack
> thereof.
>
> But then there are such errors that occur because the writers don't
> know any better.  And, worse yet, these become perpetuated.

Most unusually, I feel I must contradict you all   :)

I don't think the typist-homonym phenomenon is about concentration. I
think it's about the fact that when you write by hand, you can feel the
shapes of the words as you write them and to write "to" when you're
thinking "too" (fpr example) would feel quite wrong.


I don't feel that you're actually contradicting any of us. Quite the
contrary, you seem to provide the evidence we needed *s*.

Writing by hand seems a more complex activity to me (all these curves and
remembering the order of the strokes) than typing. Especially in the case of
cursive writing, you need more or less continuous attention; whereas when
you're typing, concentration is constantly interrupted with each keystroke,
as typing happens in a sort of "staccato" movement. Just look how often
young kids are sticking out their tongues when they're learning how to write
and you'll notice that this must be cpu overload for their brains. I have
almost never seen this kind of behaviour among beginning typists...not even
among those that only use two fingers ;=).

In some way, writing could be viewed as a continuous function of one
variable (= one pen) and typing a discontinuous function of at least two
variables (>= 2 fingers)...it's the continuity that makes the process
enduring and complex I think (cf. the fine art of calligraphy), not so much
the number of variables...sure, our fingers may get "entangled" (metatheses)
once in a while.

Whether that higher brainpower and bandwidth needed for writing will finally
be supplied and how it will be processed is another matter of course.

Kind greetings,

Luc Hellinckx

PS: Mmm...can't actually remember what I do when I lie down Ron, as I tend
to fall asleep pretty fast...and when I don't: I'll leave that to your vivid
imagination...let's just say I never write in bed...and Borat is never
involved either *s*.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20070419/48728760/attachment.htm>