Dave Keenan wrote: ↑Wed Nov 11, 2020 7:54 pm
I added some links and the note (adapted from the main article): "If a symbol contains no flags, i.e., only accents and a bare shaft, then the last vowel "o" or "i" becomes "ao" or "ai" to indicate the overall direction of the symbol (the direction of the bare shaft)."
Thanks for reminding me of that rule. I might have forgotten it in the code.
I've been thinking about how, due to the "qu"s, many of those sagispeak tina names are embarrassingly long, when considering what tiny pitch alterations they represent.
I thought the idea here was that sure, the 2-letter "qu" was cumbersome, but hey, it's Magrathean; it gets the dregs.
Here's what I said in defense of "qu" when I first introduced it:
cmloegcmluin wrote: ↑Sat Mar 28, 2020 12:58 pm
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.
And I've been thinking about how "qu" is not a simple consonant but a blend /kw/, which can be difficult for some non-English speakers, who may tend to pronounce it as simply /k/, in which case
sounds the same as
, namely "kai".
I'm not aware of any evidence that /kw/ is a difficult consonant combination for the average human. Though I agree that if it collapsed to /k/ we'd have a problem. And we'd also have a problem if some speakers collapsed it to /w/ since that's the language-permitting alternative to /dʒɐt/ ("jat").
If we wanted a common non-blended consonant sound for the 1-tina horn etc, that we haven't already allowed as a possible pronunciation of any letter used so far, all I can think of is "th", pronounced as either unvoiced /θ/ or voiced /ð/.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPA_pulmo ... with_audio
is tao, if
was pronounced "thao" it could be confused with |)), since "h" means double-flag elsewhere, but there is no such flag combination as |)). If there were a lot of" thao"s and "thi"s it could start to sound like the King James Bible.
And of course, spelling it as "th" wouldn't solve the long-spellings problem.
I coulda' sworn we'd scorned thorn
, but I can't dig up any evidence of it. So here's a link to a Quora page where people unanimously pile on responses saying it's the most idiosyncratic sound to English: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-most- ... -languages
Those "th" sounds are exotic to most humans. Us Anglophones are the weirdos in this case. That's why I never recommended them and would have argued against them if they came up.
One thing "th" has going for it is its presence in the word "Magrathean", though, which I only mention because "mi" has the initial "m" from it, too.
Whoa, I'm not sure if that's better or worse than when I do find it cited in actual academic papers!
Nice find. I outta' pester them about it.
What else could we do? Back in this post
I proposed a vowels-only approach, which Dave wasn't a fan of (unless he meant that he loves singing Old MacDonald had a farm?)
A fairly wild suggestion occurs to me. How about the "ng" sound, /ŋ/? It wouldn't solve the 2-letter problem, it may still have issues of collapsing into an existing sound such as /n/ or /g/, and it isn't even a productive initial consonant in English (meaning no natural English words begin with this sound, which is a problem because some Sagispeak would). But it is at least a technically distinct phoneme where /kw/ is a combination of two we're already using. I needed to verify that it was pretty common cross-linguistically, and I found this https://phoible.org/parameters
which appears to be a ranking of all phonemes' popularity across all languages, which is pretty darn awesome if that's the case! And /ŋ/ comes up at position 14 on that list, which ain't bad at all, and its Wikipedia article
has examples for a ton of languages. If you wanted to solve the initial "ng" problem, you could throw an "e" in front of it, but then I think that makes it a bit harder to distinguish the dotted-tina accents from undotted ones.
The only other thing I can think of is the voiceless w /ʍ/ in some words which start with "wh", which some English speakers distinguish, but that turns up at the very bottom of that Phoible list, and its Wikipedia article
has almost no examples in other languages. And I don't think it's productive with the vowel "o", i.e. "who" is not going to read /ʍoʊ/ but /hu:/.
I really don't think we're gonna' get any better than "qu" /kw/ myself, but if anyone beats it, happy to make the updates.