Timeline for What is the extent of Featural Writing?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 9, 2016 at 0:43 | comment | added | rek | @roseannadu Whether or not the vocal chords engage is not abstract. There is a reason the IPA differentiates between the two -- it is a measurable, observable physiological distinction. | |
| Sep 8, 2016 at 18:10 | comment | added | roseannadu | It's abstract in the sense that it's turning a scale of infinite points into two discrete categories. In English there are some /p/ that are more like [b] than they are like other /p/ for example. They're just abstract phonological categories. VOT can be measured and agreed upon regardless of the people doing the listening or whether they understand the sample they're listening to. That's what I meant by abstract. A featural writing system would have more utility among more languages if it showed VOT rather than voicing. | |
| Sep 8, 2016 at 17:58 | comment | added | TrEs-2b | @roseannadu no, voicing isn't abstract at all. That is the same as saying there is only an abstract difference between P and B, or F and V | |
| Sep 8, 2016 at 17:57 | comment | added | roseannadu | Voicing is kind of abstract, no? It's fine for featural systems, but we can break it into constituent parts and simply indicate voice onset time somehow. Given how many languages contrast between more than just two values of voice+ or voice-, that may be better without knowing the phonology of the language(s) which will use the writing system. | |
| Sep 7, 2016 at 21:16 | comment | added | TrEs-2b | @rek good point. I guess it is a mix of featural and logographic | |
| Sep 7, 2016 at 21:14 | comment | added | rek | @UncleTres Featural writing only applies to sound. Glyphs that aren't pronounced, or modifications to glyphs that don't modify the pronunciation, aren't featural. | |
| Sep 7, 2016 at 20:53 | comment | added | TrEs-2b | @rek that is why it is in a different category to Sound. | |
| Sep 7, 2016 at 20:51 | comment | added | rek | Some of these fall outside the expected scope of featural writing. Unless capitalization changes the phone, for example, multiple cases aren't featural. | |
| Sep 7, 2016 at 20:27 | comment | added | TrEs-2b | @NexTerren Oh my sides. they are splitting. | |
| Sep 7, 2016 at 20:26 | comment | added | Ranger | Hey @UncleTres, this guy seems to know what he's talking about. | |
| Sep 7, 2016 at 18:37 | history | answered | TrEs-2b | CC BY-SA 3.0 |