Re: Proposed Phonemic Tehtar Mode for English
- Hi Ronald Kyrmse
I like your proposal. It's almost the same as what I'd have chosen.
That is to say, I chose it a few weeks ago for a transcription of the
poem Errantry on which I started a recent thread in #4689. You may
have a look at it since in this thread, Dave and me have discussed
some of the most controversial points of such a mode. Anyway, I'm
going to write down my position again (so it becomes a little bit
> normal Modern English pronunciationTo me, this is too unambiguously attested as to drop it (and I don't
> uses no "long _ae_" (the long version of the vowel in _sat_). JRRT
> did use an <inverted a-tehta> (three dots in a triangle pointing
> downwards) for Anglo-Saxon _ae_, but, as explained, we do not have
> to use it; furthermore it does not exist in all tengwar fonts.
care about your latter point).
> The <circumflex>,The three dots version and the circumflex version are said to be a
> in Quenya spelling an alternative to the <three dots>, has been
> adopted for the vowel in _sun_ due to a similarity between this
> sound and a short _a_,
mere variant, so I dislike to make this difference distinctive. The
representation of this sound is the main problem of a phonemic tehtar
mode for English. I prefer the grave accent, even though it's only
attested for a schwa in DTS 41.
> bird, her, turn, learn = 3: [inverted epsilon with colon] <longThe attested spelling in DTS 47 (which I prefer) is óre + dot below.
> carrier + óre>
> the, buttER, sofA, About = [schwa, or inverted e] <unutehta dot or...
> short carrier> (Note 5)
> Note 5: The <unutehta dot>, also called _unuticse_ (wronglyTo me, syllabicity and schwa shouldn't be represented in the same way.
> spelled _nuntixë_ in the published "Etymologies") signifies the
> "colourless" vowel denoted by schwa, and may also be used under
> syllabic consonants, as in _voweL_, _commoN_, _bottoM_.
In the attested phonemic modes, they are distinguished. I think that
words such as _gondola_ /gond@l@/, _marjoram_ /mardZ@r@m/ with two
subsequent schwa syllables must not have a mark that could be mistaken
for a syllabic consonant mark.
I prefer to use the dot only as syllabicity marker, as attested in DTS
39 (in the word _Britain_ that has the right tehtar-tengwar order) and
in the similar use for the vowel of _turn_ seen in DTS 47. I'd
represent the schwa, on the other hand, with the grave accent, the
same tehtar I'd use as well for the vowel of _nut_.
> A <short...
> carrier> should be used in word-initial position, as in _About_.
Why so? (I've come to a similar solution, but I'm not sure about it.)
j. 'mach' wust