Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Proposed Phonemic Tehtar Mode for English

Expand Messages
  • j_mach_wust
    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
    Message 1 of 2 , Apr 7, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      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
      "realer" ;).

      > normal Modern English pronunciation
      > 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.

      To me, this is too unambiguously attested as to drop it (and I don't
      care about your latter point).

      > The <circumflex>,
      > 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_,

      The three dots version and the circumflex version are said to be 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] <long
      > carrier + óre>

      The attested spelling in DTS 47 (which I prefer) is óre + dot below.

      > the, buttER, sofA, About = [schwa, or inverted e] <unutehta dot or
      > short carrier> (Note 5)
      > Note 5: The <unutehta dot>, also called _unuticse_ (wrongly
      > 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_.

      To me, syllabicity and schwa shouldn't be represented in the same way.
      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
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.