Re: A Proposal for a Modern Vulcan script
Rob Zook 
Fri, 31 Oct 1997 08:48:17 -0600

At 08:35 AM 10/31/97 -0600, Saul wrote:
>> I have been trying to create an organized chart of Vulcan
>> PhonEmes. I think it's pretty accurate now - although I won't
>> guarantee it. If I'm missing a phonEme let me know and I'll
>> put it on there.
>
>A little touchy about that <e> aren't we?

<grin> No Saul, I was only teasing you.

>> >5. /rh/ is both described as "retroflex" and compared to a 
>> >sound which is a palato-pharyngeal approximant (the 
>> >Irish/American /r/). This discrepency needs to be explained.
>> 
>> Now, this one I also notice, I mixed ZC orthography and yours.
>> You did this one as "rr" right?
>
>Mmm? Oh, yes, but that isn't what I was talking about. That is, I
>recommended <rr> to replace <rh> in order to restrict a following <h>
>to representing aspiration or similar things. But the sound /rh/
>itself is described as two different sounds, and we'll have to decide
>(or be told) which is more correct, or if the difference is related
>to dialect, or represents two allophones, etc.

"rh -            voiced retroflex vibrant, somewhat like American or
                Irish 'r'."

Hmmm, so what would be a good example of the first one, the voiced
retroflexed vibrant? BTW, what does vibrant refere to? Does it equate
to "trill" which I see on the IPA consonent chart?

>> >6. Just to be picky: the unit of phonology is, as far as I 
>> >know, the phonEme, as opposed to the phonOme.
>> 
>> Ah, I love English spelling - don't you? Funny, I did not
>> remember spelling it as phonOme anywhere ;-)
>
>Huh?

Never mind, evidently I unduely understated my modest attempt at 
humour. I probably spelled it as phonome, but not as phonOme ;-)

>Rob, I only capitalized the vowels to draw attention to them. I
>assumed, because I consistently spell the word one way and you
>consistently spell it another, that you weren't seeing the
>difference. The appearance of "phonomological," just pushed me over
>the edge, I guess.

I guess I kept missing that. So phonomological should be spelled
phonemological? Or am I making a word up here? Perhaps I should say
a phonemic analysis?

Rob Z.
--------------------------------------------------------
Man has such a predilection for systems and abstract deductions that
he is ready to distort the truth intentionally, he is ready to deny 
the evidence of his senses only to justify his logic.
-- Notes from Underground, Fyodor Dostoyevsky