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

Re: "iu" and "ui" alternative spellings [was: Chin. Mode: No "-io", but "-io-"]

Expand Messages
  • j_mach_wust
    Hisilome wrote: ... I m glad to hear that. Some people abhor the slightest theoretical possibility of ambiguity. I don t either. However, I think there are
    Message 1 of 33 , Mar 12, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hisilome wrote:
      > Thus, if we stick to not marking the fifth tone, theoretically there
      > might be some problems, but in actual usage, ambiguity would very
      > rarely arise. In fact, as I pointed out, I believe only your one
      > example, the syllable _liao_, could be problematic.*

      I'm glad to hear that. Some people abhor the slightest theoretical
      possibility of ambiguity. I don't either. However, I think there are
      some more syllables where such an ambiguity might arise: lai - le ai;
      luai - luo ai; lao - le ao; lou - le ou; lui - luo ei; lou - le ou;
      liu - lie ou. It concerns every combination with initial consonant
      that ends in yanta or úre. Another workaround instead of using an
      isolated short carrier for _ai ao ei ou_ might be to place a single
      dot below yanta/úre when it combines with an initial consonant (which
      I have inconsistently done in my first table, the one with the a-tehta).

      In the case of _en eng_, however, such a workaround can only be
      achieved by using the short carrier, since these two already need to
      have a dot below in any case, unlike yanta and úre, so basically, they
      are parallel cases to simple _e_: If there's no short carrier, they
      might always be misread as if they wouldn't constitute any syllable at
      all. ... No, wait, of course I'm mistaken: If they carry a tone sign,
      then it's obvious that they constitute a syllable of themselves. So if
      there's a tone sign, the short carrier can be left away even in _en eng_.

      > In your last proposal (using gasdil for /a/) one could then use
      > a "syllable onset sign" for _ao_ (as a syllable) to avoid possible
      > confusion, while doing without it elsewhere. And that would include
      > _ei, ou, en, eng_--only for _e_ you'd need the carrier, since
      > otherwise you'd be left with a blank, wouldn't you? Hm, not quite:
      > one _might_ also want to use the carrier to distinguish _ou_ from
      > _o_ (which is very rare, though, comprising only a few characters,
      > all interjections). Thus, uure alone = _o_, short carrier + uure =
      > _ou_, tengwa + uure = _-ou_.

      That _o_ was not even mentioned in the table I kept referring to. It's
      not unusual for (lexicalized) interjections to exceed the usual sound
      system of a language. The wikipedia table also mentions the final _ê_
      to occur in certain interjections. How to transcribe them? Since they
      transgress the normal sound system, they might be transcribed with
      crazy combinations that transgress the normal tengwar-tehtar
      combinations: Perhaps with the otherwise impossible and meaningless
      combinations yanta + two dots and úre + modified left curl?

      > <<<DTS 46 and 49, right. I somehow prefer to put the modified left-
      > curl on top and the other diacritic under it, as in the King's
      > Letter. Would the fonts allow that as well?>>>

      The most recent generation of tengwar fonts does, since they provide
      two different kinds of modified left curls: One to be placed as the
      only tehta above a tengwa and another one to be placed at the left
      edge above the tengwa so that there is place for a second tehta at the
      right edge. The practical problem is that both in Johan Winge's
      tengwar annatar font and in Måns Björkman's tengwar parmaite font,
      this second kind of modified left curl is not within the normal font,
      but within an additional so called A-font, so you need to switch fonts
      to type them. Add to that there are already four different kinds of
      each tehta to be placed above tengwar of different widths, so in the
      end you have to choose one of eight different modified left curl
      tehtar out of two different fonts... Things may be better with the new
      intelligent font versions, but they won't work on my mac anyway...

      Here I've spelled out a little sample text with complete tone symbols
      (it's taken from http://www.omniglot.com/writing/chinese.htm and I
      hope I haven't made too much errors). I have put the two dots below
      the tengwar in all cases where there is another tehta above (which is
      all cases in that short text). For a combination of the two dots below
      and the single dot below (a combination that has been quite frequent),
      I have used the three dots below tehtar, even though it is really a
      combination. For the combination of the two dots below and the
      vertical stroke below, I have placed both tehtar besides each other
      which worked quite well (though that may be more difficult if there is
      a descending telco). Certain combinations of the modified left curl
      with another tehta have become quite messy (in spite of the eight
      different versions of the modified curl). Since neither the two dots
      below nor the vertical stroke below have a specialized lambe version,
      I have sometimes used the numeral that looks like a small lambe. And
      finally, I have used a single dot for the transcription of the high
      tone, not a macron (horizontal bar). The fonts I've used are Johan
      Winge's tengwar annatar and tengar annatar alt. In the end, I think it
      has worked quite well. Here it is (and there are again a pdf and an
      rtf version in the same directory):


      j. 'mach' wust
    • Melroch 'Aestan
      ... Mandarin was a typo for Cantonese here. Sorry. -- /BP 8^) -- Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
      Message 33 of 33 , Mar 19, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        hisilome skrev:

        >>Duh, with six or seven tonemes Mandarin even stretches Roman to
        >>its limits!
        > [ Well, I'm no experts on linguistics (obviously!), so I may
        > misunderstand you here--but if "tonemes" are identical to tones,
        > standard Mandarin has four or five, and as far as I know some
        > subdialects of Mandarin have as little as three. Why six or seven? ]

        "Mandarin" was a typo for "Cantonese" here. Sorry.

        /BP 8^)>
        Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
        A h-ammen ledin i phith! \ \
        __ ____ ____ _____________ ____ __ __ __ / /
        \ \/___ \\__ \ /___ _____/\ \\__ \\ \ \ \\ \ / /
        / / / / / \ / /Melroch\ \_/ // / / // / / /
        / /___/ /_ / /\ \ / /Roccondil\_ // /__/ // /__/ /
        /_________//_/ \_\/ /Eowine __ / / \___/\_\\___/\_\
        Gwaedhvenn Angeliniel\ \______/ /a/ /_h-adar Merthol naun
        || Lenda lenda pellalenda pellatellenda kuivie aiya! ||
        "A coincidence, as we say in Middle-Earth" (JRR Tolkien)
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.