Re: Zvelebil/Epstein/McReynold Comparison
Saul Epstein 
Mon, 13 Jul 1998 09:04:58 -0500

Quotes from: Rob Zook <rzook*informix,com>
Date: Monday, July 13, 1998 8:44 AM


>At 09:08 PM 7/10/98 -0500, Saul Epstein wrote:

>
>>:-p I would be more concerned about that if I thought we actually
>>needed more than six vowel signs.
>
>Well, just going by the words in the dictionary we have Shikahr,
>Venlinahr, Sehlat, all of which use that vowel+h format. When
Marketa,
>pronounced these words over the phone the <vowel>+<h> sounded much
>different than that <vowel> without the <h>. One of the reasons I'd
>like keep that as a formal transcription rule. It would make the
>transcription a little more phonetic than only six vowel sounds would
>allow.

Hmm. There are times when a more more phonetic or "narrow"
transcription is useful, and there are times when a more phonemic or
"broad" transcription is useful. I'll have to listen to my copy of
your tape (which I still haven't returned...) again to see if I can
hear what you're talking about. I was just under the impression that
the Hs were preserving the Vulcan pronunciation against a more typical
English interpretation, and therefore weren't necessary once we had
the distribution worked out...

>>And, now that I think about it, if
>>we use <bh> for /v/, and <v> for /w/ (on the same pattern as <ph>
for
>>/f/ and <f> for original <w~>, that frees up <w> for /u/ and <u> for
>>/^/.
>
>Yes, it's a nice pattern, but I think it would really confuse
beginning
>speakers.

Hence the mad-scientist laughter. I'm just playing now, since mixing
ZC with some kind of revision seems to have the most support. I don't
expect most of the suggestions I'm currently making to be adopted, I'm
just exploring possible directions for people to consider.

--
from Saul Epstein
locus*planetkc,com - www,planetkc,com/locus
"Surahkri' ow'pahcur theh's'hi theh's'chah'; theh's'pahrkah
    theh's'hi surahkehchah'."
                                        -- K'dvahrihn Ursw~l'aht