"Sagispeak"

User avatar
Dave Keenan
Site Admin
Posts: 1024
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 2:59 pm
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Contact:

Re: "Sagispeak"

Post by Dave Keenan »

cmloegcmluin wrote:
Sat Mar 28, 2020 12:36 am
Okay, but Magratheans are out of scope for now...
Yeah. It's good that you at least considered them enough to show that whatever scheme we come up with for the new Olympians, does not lock out possible solutions for the Magratheans. We certainly shouldn't try to finalise the Magratheans now.
What did you think of my more serious proposal to use apostrophes to break double vowels, e.g. "mo'ovai" for :,::.::/|\:
I think that's an excellent idea. But I wonder if we should instead consider giving the the schisma diacritics a consonant (e.g. m or b) and no consonant for the minas, or claw back a consonant from the many allowed for "j" (as you pointed out).
And of adding “sch” to the table for German “sh” sound, as long as we’re adding “tsh” for French “ch” sound.
Such a good idea, that I did it as soon as I read it. :)

User avatar
cmloegcmluin
Site Admin
Posts: 721
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:10 pm
Location: San Francisco, California, USA
Real Name: Douglas Blumeyer
Contact:

Re: "Sagispeak"

Post by cmloegcmluin »

I wonder if we should instead consider giving the the schisma diacritics a consonant (e.g. m or b) and no consonant for the minas
Aw, man! If reexamining the schisma and schisminas is on the table, we can have some fun...
or claw back a consonant from the many allowed for "j" (as you pointed out)
I wish we could... but I think the constraints laid out at the beginning are good - across the most widely spoken languages using the Latin alphabet, we should avoid using letters with common overlapping pronunciations.

So I really want to reduce the number of letters the minas consume from two to one. "m" for mina is a gimme. While I am a fan of the "b" for bi-mina, I don't think it's worth a letter. Surely somehow we can use two "m"s for two minas. When we double flags we double the consonant as a single cluster; :/|: = "p", :/ /|: = "pp". And then we have the layer where the second of the two doubled consonants converts to an "h" to alter the pronunciation of the remaining consonant to an otherwise unused pronunciation: "pp" -> "ph" which sounds like /f/. And in cases where a language doesn't have the resultant pronunciation, a fallback is to insert an "a" between the two consonants, so that "ph" can be pronounced (and maybe also spelled?) "pah", as in "pahao". Well, a doubled "m" has two problems, though; "mm" can -> "mh", but : 1) neither "mm" nor "mh" ever appear as an initial consonant cluster for syllables, and 2) neither "mm" nor "mh" alter the pronunciation from "m". However! Why not leverage the effect of the a-insertion, and let the bi-mina be represented by "mah"? It won't be ambiguous with the "h"s used for the main symbols because those are always followed by "ao" or "ai".

With the "b" freed, we can use that for the schismina. I don't have a visual or aural mnemonic or anything, but it's available.

Finally, it occurs to me that we haven't used q. I suppose we'd end up with "qui" and "quo" in that case; putting a "q" in front of any other vowel, at least in English, is almost always in foreign words, like "qi" and "Qatar" and "qoph"... but since we haven't used "u" for anything else yet, so it doesn't bother me. It's an extra letter, and also an extra phoneme in the pronunciation (/kw/) but since it would be rarely used, maybe that's okay. Plus, I think the "qu" sound appears often in words that connote little things, like "quiet", "quaint", "quantum", that it helps a tad. So what if the Magratheans used the lone i and o for half-tinas, and qui and quo for full tinas? And the tri-mina could be "mahah".

tinas    up           down
0.5      i            o
1.0      qui          quo
1.5      iqui         oquo
2.0      quiqui       quoquo
2.5      iquiqui      oquoquo

3.0      mi           mo

3.5      imi          omo
4.0      quimi        quomo
4.5      iquimi       oquomo
5.0      quiquimi     quoquomo
5.5      iquiquimi    oquoquomo

6.0      mahi         maho

6.5      imahi        omaho
7.0      quimahi      quomaho
7.5      iquimahi     oquomaho
8.0      quiquimahi   quoquomaho
8.5      iquiquimahi  oquoquomaho

9.0      mahahi       mahaho

9.5      imahahi      omahaho

User avatar
Dave Keenan
Site Admin
Posts: 1024
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 2:59 pm
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Contact:

Re: "Sagispeak"

Post by Dave Keenan »

cmloegcmluin wrote:
Sat Mar 28, 2020 12:58 pm
"m" for mina is a gimme. ... Surely somehow we can use two "m"s for two minas.
...
With the "b" freed, we can use that for the schismina. I don't have a visual or aural mnemonic or anything, but it's available.
...
So what if the Magratheans used the lone i and o for half-tinas, and qui and quo for full tinas? And the tri-mina could be "mahah".
Brilliant! Thanks!

Why not just momo and mimi for double minas and momomo and mimimi for triple minas?

I have some mnemonics for bi and bo for the 5-schisma diacritics:
1. The consonants "b" and "p" both name prime-5 components. "b" and "p" are almost the same phoneme, except that "b" is voiced and "p" is not.
2. The untempered 5-schisma is about 2 cents, a bi-cent.

I have updated the posts on pages 2 and 3 of this topic, that give the full pronunciation scheme.

User avatar
cmloegcmluin
Site Admin
Posts: 721
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:10 pm
Location: San Francisco, California, USA
Real Name: Douglas Blumeyer
Contact:

Re: "Sagispeak"

Post by cmloegcmluin »

Sweet, I'm glad you like it!
Why not just momo and mimi for double minas and momomo and mimimi for triple minas?
Actually I did first consider "momo", "mimi", "momomo", and "mimimi", but I thought that the use of the "a"s and the "h"s had a few advantages:
  1. it more closely follows the patterns laid out for the main symbols when doubling elements;
  2. the repeated syllables are less natural, at least in English (and dare I say sillier);
  3. the repeated syllables are harder to differentiate when spoken ("wait, was that a "mimi" or a "mimimi"?)
Of course the drawback is that it's more complex to remember "mi" -> "mahi" -> "mahahi".

Anyway, I don't feel strongly about the issue. Perhaps someone else could chime in. Or perhaps both options could be accepted.

User avatar
Dave Keenan
Site Admin
Posts: 1024
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 2:59 pm
Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Contact:

Re: "Sagispeak"

Post by Dave Keenan »

cmloegcmluin wrote:
Sun Mar 29, 2020 4:33 am
Of course the drawback is that it's more complex to remember "mi" -> "mahi" -> "mahahi".
Right. It's likely to be so little used, that I think anyone who learns that one of them is pronounced "mi" will just assume that two will be "mimi". There is no "mimimi" in Olympian, or in any notation so far.

User avatar
cmloegcmluin
Site Admin
Posts: 721
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:10 pm
Location: San Francisco, California, USA
Real Name: Douglas Blumeyer
Contact:

Re: "Sagispeak"

Post by cmloegcmluin »

“Mimi” works for me. Let’s go with that. Really I only proposed the versions with “a” and “h” because I thought they’d be more likely to be what y’all wanted, not because I preferred them.

Post Reply