DOCSLIB.ORG

English Orthography Is Not “Close to Optimal”

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
English Orthography Is Not “Close to Optimal” English orthography is not “close to optimal” Garrett Nicolai and Grzegorz Kondrak Department of Computing Science University of Alberta nicolai,gkondrak @ualberta.ca { } Abstract (2) “phonetic variation is not indicated where it is predictable by a general rule” (predictability). They In spite of the apparent irregularity of the conclude that “conventional orthography is [. ] a English spelling system, Chomsky and Halle (1968) characterize it as “near optimal”. We near optimal system for the lexical representation of investigate this assertion using computational English words” (page 49), which we refer to as the techniques and resources. We design an al- optimality claim. gorithm to generate word spellings that max- Chomsky and Halle’s account of English orthog- imize both phonemic transparency and mor- raphy is not without its detractors. Steinberg (1973) phological consistency. Experimental results argues against the idea that speakers store abstract demonstrate that the constructed system is underlying forms of separate morphemes and apply much closer to optimality than the traditional English orthography. sequences of phonological rules during composi- tion. Sampson (1985) cites the work of Yule (1978) in asserting that many common English word-forms 1 Introduction provide counter-evidence to their vowel alternation English spelling is notorious for its irregularity. observations. Derwing (1992) maintains that the ob- Kominek and Black (2006) estimate that it is about servations only hold for five vowel alternations that 3 times more complex than German, and 40 times can be predicted with simple spelling rules. Ac- more complex than Spanish. This is confirmed by cording to Nunn (2006), the idea that spelling repre- lower accuracy of letter-to-phoneme systems on En- sents an abstract phonological level has been aban- glish (Bisani and Ney, 2008). A survey of English doned by most linguists. Sproat (2000) notes that spelling (Carney, 1994) devotes 120 pages to de- few scholars of writing systems would agree with scribe phoneme-to-letter correspondences, and lists Chomsky and Halle, concluding that the evidence 226 letter-to-phoneme rules, almost all of which ad- for a consistent morphological representation in En- mit exceptions. Numerous proposals have been put glish orthography is equivocal. forward for spelling reforms over the years, rang- It is not our goal to formulate yet another pro- ing from small changes affecting a limited set of posal for reforming English orthography, nor even words to complete overhauls based on novel writing to argue that there is a need for such a reform. scripts (Venezky, 1970). Furthermore, we refrain from taking into account In spite of the perceived irregularity of English other potential advantages of the traditional orthog- spellings, Chomsky and Halle (1968) assert that they raphy, such as reflecting archaic pronunciation of remarkably well reflect abstract underlying forms, native words, preserving the original spelling of from which the surface pronunciations are generated loanwords, or maintaining orthographic similarity to with “rules of great generality and wide applicabil- cognates in other languages. Although these may ity”. They postulate two principles of an optimal be valid concerns, they are not considered as such orthographic system: (1) it should have “one repre- by Chomsky and Halle. Instead, our primary ob- sentation for each lexical entry” (consistency); and, jective is a deeper understanding of how the phono- 537 Human Language Technologies: The 2015 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL, pages 537–545, Denver, Colorado, May 31 – June 5, 2015. c 2015 Association for Computational Linguistics logical and morphological characteristics of English the other hand, the orthography of Serbo-Croatian are reflected in its traditional orthography, which is was originally created according to the rule “write currently the dominant medium of information ex- as you speak”, so that the spelling can be unam- change in the world. biguously produced from pronunciation. This does In this paper, we investigate the issue of ortho- not mean that the pronunciation is completely pre- graphic optimality from the computational perspec- dictable from spelling; for example, lexical stress is tive. We define metrics to quantify the degree of op- not marked (Sproat, 2000). timality of a spelling system in terms of phonemic In this paper, we measure phonemic trans- transparency and morphological consistency. We parency by computing average perplexity between design an algorithm to generate an orthography that graphemes and phonemes. Roughly speaking, maximizes both types of optimality, and implement phonemic perplexity indicates how many differ- it using computational tools and resources. We show ent graphemes on average correspond to a single experimentally that the traditional orthography is phoneme, while graphemic perplexity reflects the much further from optimality than our constructed corresponding ambiguity of graphemes. We provide system, which contradicts the claim of Chomsky and a formal definition in Section 5. Halle. 2.2 Morphological optimality 2 Optimality A purely morphemic writing system would have a unique graphemic representation for each mor- In this section, we define the notions of phone- pheme. Chinese is usually given as an example of mic and morphemic optimality, and our general ap- a near-morphemic writing system. In this paper, proach to quantifying them. We propose two theo- we construct an abstract morphemic spelling sys- retical orthographies that are phonemically and mor- tem for English by selecting a single alphabetic form phologically optimal, respectively. We argue that no for each morpheme, and simply concatenating them orthographic system for English can be simultane- to make up words. For example, the morphemic ously optimal according to both criteria. spelling of viscosity could be ‘viscous ity’.1 · We define morphemic optimality to correspond 2.1 Phonemic optimality to the consistency principle of Chomsky and Halle. A purely phonemic system would have a per- The rationale is that a unique spelling for each mor- fect one-to-one relationship between graphemes and pheme should allow related words to be readily iden- phonemes. Rogers (2005) states that no standard tified in the mental lexicon. Sproat (2000) dis- writing system completely satisfies this property, tinguishes between morpheme-oriented “deep” or- although Finnish orthography comes remarkably thographies, like Russian, and phoneme-oriented close. For our purposes, we assume the International “shallow” orthographies, like Serbo-Croatian. Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) transcription to be such an We propose to measure morphemic consistency ideal system. For example, the IPA transcription of by computing the average edit distance between the word viscosity is [vIskAs@ti]. We obtain the tran- morpheme representations in different word-forms. scriptions from a digital dictionary that represents The less variation morpheme spellings exhibit in a the General American pronunciation of English. writing system, the higher the corresponding value Phonemic transparency can be considered in two of the morphemic transparency will be. We define directions: from letters to phonemes, and vice versa. the measure in Section 5. The pronunciation of Spanish words is recover- It is impossible to achieve complete phonemic able from the spelling by applying a limited set of and morphemic optimality within one system de- rules (Kominek and Black, 2006). However, there signed for English spelling. For example, the stem is some ambiguity in the opposite direction; for ex- morpheme of verb forms hearing and heard is ample, the phoneme [b] can be expressed with ei- 1 Non-traditional spellings are written within single quotes. ther ‘b’ or ’v’. As a result, it is not unusual for na- Morphemes may be explicitly separated by the centered dot tive Spanish speakers to make spelling mistakes. On character. 538 spelled identically but pronounced differently. If // Create word sets we changed the spellings to indicate the difference 1: for each word w in lexicon L do in pronunciation, we would move towards phone- 2: for each morpheme m in w do mic optimality, but away from morphemic optimal- 3: add w to word set Sm ity. Apart from purely phonographic or logographic // Generate morpheme representations variants, any English spelling system must be a com- 4: for each word set Sm do promise between phonemic and morphemic trans- 5: m0 := longest representation of m parency. In this paper, we attempt to algorithmi- 6: for each word w in Sm do cally create an orthography that simultaneously ap- 7: aw := alignment of m0 and w proaches the optimality along both dimensions. 8: add aw to multi-alignment A 9: for each position i in A do 3 Algorithm 10: select representative phoneme r[i] 11: r := r[1.. m ] In this section, we describe our algorithm for gener- m | 0| ating English spellings (Figure 1), which serves as a // Adopt a surface phoneme predictor constructive proof that the traditional orthography is 12: Pronounce := Predictor (L) not optimal. Our objective is to find the best com- // Generate word representations promise between phonemic transparency and mor- 13: for each word w = m1 . mk do 14: r := r ... r phemic consistency. Section 3.1 explains how we m1 · · mk derive a unique representation for each morpheme. 15: for each phoneme r[i] in r do 16: if Pronounce(r[i]) = w[i] then Section 3.2 shows how the morpheme representa- 6 tions are combined into word spellings. Without a 17: r[i] := w[i] loss of generality, the generated spellings are com- 18: r := r[1.. w ] w | | posed of IPA symbols. Figure 1: Spelling generation algorithm. All representa- 3.1 Morpheme representations tions consists of phonemes. We start by identifying all morphemes in the lexicon, and associating each morpheme with sets of words mon representation for a morpheme. We extract the that contain it (lines 1–3 in Figure 1). An example phonemic representation of each allomorph in the word set that corresponds to the morpheme atom is word set, and perform a multi-alignment of the rep- shown in Table 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Standardization in Early English Orthography
    Standardization in Early English Orthography Over thirty years ago Fred Brengelman pointed out that since at least 1909 and George Krapp’s Modern English: Its Growth and Present Use, it was widely assumed that English printers played the major role in the standardization of English spelling.1 Brengelman demonstrated convincingly that the role of the printers was at best minimal and that much more important was the work done in the late 16th and 17th centuries by early English orthoepists and spelling reformers – people like Richard Mulcaster, John Cheke, Thomas Smith, John Hart, William Bullokar, Alexander Gil, and Richard Hodges.2 Brengelman’s argument is completely convincing, but it concentrates on developments rather late in the history of English orthography – developments that were external to the system itself and basically top-down. It necessarily ignores the extent to which much standardization occurred naturally and internally during the 11th through 16th centuries. This early standardization was not a top-down process, but rather bottom-up, arising from the communication acts of individual spellers and their readers – many small actions by many agents. In what follows I argue that English orthography is an evolving system, and that this evolution produced a degree of standardization upon which the 16th and 17th century orthoepists could base their work, work that not only further rationalized and standardized our orthography, as Brengelman has shown, but also marked the beginning of the essentially top-down system that we have today. English Orthography as an Evolving Complex System. English orthography is not just an evolving system; it is an evolving complex system – adaptive, self-regulating, and self-organizing.
    [Show full text]
  • ELL101: Intro to Linguistics Week 1 Phonetics &
    ELL101: Intro to Linguistics Week 1 Phonetics & IPA Tomonori Nagano <[email protected]> Education and Language Acquisition Dept. LaGuardia Community College August 16, 2017 . Tomonori Nagano <[email protected]> Edu&Lang Acq. Dept., LaGuardia CC 1/41 Fields of linguistics • Week 1-2: Phonetics (physical sound properties) • Week 2-3: Phonology (speech sound rules) • Week 4: Morphology (word parts) • Week 5-6: Syntax (structure) • Week 7-8: Semantics (meaning) • Week 7-8: Pragmatics (conversation & convention) • Week 9: First & Second language acquisition • Week 10-12: Historical linguistics (history of language) • Week 10-12: Socio-linguistics (language in society) • Week 10-12: Neuro-linguistics (the brain and language) • Week 10-12: Computational linguistics (computer and language) • Week 10-12: Evolutional linguistics (how language evolved in human history) . Tomonori Nagano <[email protected]> Edu&Lang Acq. Dept., LaGuardia CC 2/41 Overview Phonetics Phonetics is a study of the characteristics of the speech sound (p.30; Yule (2010)) Branches of phonetics • Articulatory phonetics • how speech sounds are made • Acoustic phonetics • physical properties of speech sounds • Auditory phonetics • how speech sounds are perceived • See some examples of phonetics research: • Speech visualization (acoustic / auditory phonetics) • ”McGurk effect” (auditory phonetics) . Tomonori Nagano <[email protected]> Edu&Lang Acq. Dept., LaGuardia CC 3/41 Acoustic phonetics (example) • The speech wave (spectorogram) of ”[a] (as in above), [ɛ] (as in bed), and [ɪ] (as in bit)” 5000 ) z H ( y c n e u q e r F 0 0 . .0.3799. Time (s) . Tomonori Nagano <[email protected]> Edu&Lang Acq. Dept., LaGuardia CC 4/41 Acoustic phonetics (example) • The speech wave (spectorogram) of ”Was that a good movie you saw?” 5000 ) z H ( y c n e u q e r F 0 0 2.926 Time (s) .
    [Show full text]
  • 1 English Spelling and Pronunciation
    ISSN: 2456-8104 http://www.jrspelt.com Issue 5, Vol. 2, 2018 English Spelling and Pronunciation - A Brief Study Prof. V. Chandra Sekhar Rao ([email protected] ) Professor in English, SITECH, Hyderabad Abstract The present paper aims at the correlation between spelling and pronunciation of English words. English spelling is almost divorced from its pronunciation and there is no perfect guide how to 1 learn the pronunciation of the words. The letters of alphabet used are always inadequate to represent the sounds. English alphabet contains only 26 letters but the sounds 44. IPA symbols are needed to understand the intelligibility of the pronunciation and the spelling-designed. Learners of English language have to understand that words from other languages may be adopted without being adapted to the spelling system. Most of the letters of English alphabet produce multiple pronunciations. English Pronouncing Dictionary is needed for better understanding of the spelling and pronunciation. Keywords: Spelling and Pronunciation, Orthography, Intelligibility, Phonetic Symbols Introduction "If we know the sounds of a word (in English) we can't know how to spell it; if we know the ` spelling, we can't know how to pronounce it." (Otto Jespersen, philologist, Essentials of English Grammar, 1905, page 11). "English spelling is almost divorced from its pronunciation and forms hardly any guide as to how words should be pronounced." (Mont Follick, The Case for Spelling Reform, 1964, page 87). English, as a global language of communication, is spoken, written and used widely for many different purposes - international diplomatic relations, business, science and technology. It is also called the library language and medium of instructions in higher education - science and technology, computer and software engineering, medicine and law, pharmacy and nursing, commerce and management, fashion technology and so on.
    [Show full text]
  • Sound and Fury: English Phonology 2
    Sound and Fury: English Phonology 2 Sound and Fury: English Phonology /'sawnd @n 'fjU®ij: 'IèglIS f@'nAl@Aij/ In this chapter, we look at English sound patterns. We learn about the distinct sounds that make up words (phonemes), and the mech- anisms in the vocal tract that are employed to produce them. We learn a system of writing that can be used to accurately represent pronunciation, the International Phonetic Alphabet. We think about how sounds group into families, and consider one example of sound change from the prehistory of English. This groundwork will allow us, in future chapters, to understand restrictions on phonological words in English, to look at other historical changes that have altered the pronunciation of English words in the past, and to discuss differences between dialects of English spoken today. It will also enable us to analyze other kinds of processes in English words, when we look at morphology. 2.1 English Spelling and English Pronunciation The first thing we have to do, when considering the pronunciation of English words, is find a way to represent their pronunciation accurately in print (since you can’t hear me talking). English spelling is notoriously bad at this: probably, at least once in your life as a literate English speaker, you have mispronounced a word in speech that you learned from a book; that is, you’ve probably used a spelling pronunciation. (I certainly have.) The mismatch between spelling and pronunciation is the reason that English spelling is a hard thing to master. 21 EWC02 21 17/10/05, 11:13 AM Sound and Fury: English Phonology orthography, n.
    [Show full text]
  • Hebrew Names and Name Authority in Library Catalogs by Daniel D
    Hebrew Names and Name Authority in Library Catalogs by Daniel D. Stuhlman BHL, BA, MS LS, MHL In support of the Doctor of Hebrew Literature degree Jewish University of America Skokie, IL 2004 Page 1 Abstract Hebrew Names and Name Authority in Library Catalogs By Daniel D. Stuhlman, BA, BHL, MS LS, MHL Because of the differences in alphabets, entering Hebrew names and words in English works has always been a challenge. The Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) is the source for many names both in American, Jewish and European society. This work examines given names, starting with theophoric names in the Bible, then continues with other names from the Bible and contemporary sources. The list of theophoric names is comprehensive. The other names are chosen from library catalogs and the personal records of the author. Hebrew names present challenges because of the variety of pronunciations. The same name is transliterated differently for a writer in Yiddish and Hebrew, but Yiddish names are not covered in this document. Family names are included only as they relate to the study of given names. One chapter deals with why Jacob and Joseph start with “J.” Transliteration tables from many sources are included for comparison purposes. Because parents may give any name they desire, there can be no absolute rules for using Hebrew names in English (or Latin character) library catalogs. When the cataloger can not find the Latin letter version of a name that the author prefers, the cataloger uses the rules for systematic Romanization. Through the use of rules and the understanding of the history of orthography, a library research can find the materials needed.
    [Show full text]
  • Scottish Gaelic Dialects (Continued) Author(S): Charles M
    Scottish Gaelic Dialects (Continued) Author(s): Charles M. Robertson Source: The Celtic Review, Vol. 4, No. 13 (Jul., 1907), pp. 69-80 Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30069921 Accessed: 27-06-2016 11:00 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Celtic Review This content downloaded from 131.247.112.3 on Mon, 27 Jun 2016 11:00:20 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms SCOTTISH GAELIC DIALECTS 69 SCOTTISH GAELIC DIALECTS CHARLES M. ROBERTSON (Continued from vol. iii. p. 332) The mutual action and interaction of vowels and consonants upon one another are exceptionally prominent in the pro- nunciation of Gaelic, and show themselves very insistently in the orthography of the language. The silent vowels that form a part of that orthography have their explanation in most cases in the history of the language, but practically they owe their retention, or their presence, in the modern spelling to the adjacent consonants. Cois, the dative of cas, foot, for example, derived the i from a retraction of the ending of coxi, the prehistoric form of the dative of the word, but phonetically the preservation of the i is due to the fact that s has its slender or narrow sound or the dis- tinctive sound that it has when in contact with either of the slender vowels e and i.
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns of Invented Spelling in Spanish
    California State University, San Bernardino CSUSB ScholarWorks Theses Digitization Project John M. Pfau Library 2002 Patterns of invented spelling in Spanish Mercedes Pérez Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project Part of the Bilingual, Multilingual, and Multicultural Education Commons Recommended Citation Pérez, Mercedes, "Patterns of invented spelling in Spanish" (2002). Theses Digitization Project. 2209. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project/2209 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the John M. Pfau Library at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses Digitization Project by an authorized administrator of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PATTERNS OF INVENTED SPELLING IN SPANISH A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, San Bernardino In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in ' Education: Bilingual/Cross-Cultural Education by Mercedes Perez September 2002 PATTERNS OF INVENTED SPELLING IN SPANISH A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, San Bernardino by Mercedes Perez September 2002 Approved by: 7- Dr. Barbara Flores, First Reader Date ABSTRACT This study proposed to examine' the invented spelling patterns that Spanish speaking children create in their writing. On a monthly basis four students submitted a first draft of a journal entry or a story for a two year time period, which covered both their second and third grade years. Their writing samples were then transcribed and each word used was categorized as either a conventional or an invented spelling. The invented spellings were then classified into eight categories.
    [Show full text]
  • Maccoinnich, A. (2008) Where and How Was Gaelic Written in Late Medieval and Early Modern Scotland? Orthographic Practices and Cultural Identities
    MacCoinnich, A. (2008) Where and how was Gaelic written in late medieval and early modern Scotland? Orthographic practices and cultural identities. Scottish Gaelic Studies, XXIV . pp. 309-356. ISSN 0080-8024 http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/4940/ Deposited on: 13 February 2009 Enlighten – Research publications by members of the University of Glasgow http://eprints.gla.ac.uk WHERE AND HOW WAS GAELIC WRITTEN IN LATE MEDIEVAL AND EARLY MODERN SCOTLAND? ORTHOGRAPHIC PRACTICES AND CULTURAL IDENTITIES This article owes its origins less to the paper by Kathleen Hughes (1980) suggested by this title, than to the interpretation put forward by Professor Derick Thomson (1968: 68; 1994: 100) that the Scots- based orthography used by the scribe of the Book of the Dean of Lismore (c.1514–42) to write his Gaelic was anomalous or an aberration − a view challenged by Professor Donald Meek in his articles ‘Gàidhlig is Gaylick anns na Meadhon Aoisean’ and ‘The Scoto-Gaelic scribes of late medieval Perth-shire’ (Meek 1989a; 1989b). The orthography and script used in the Book of the Dean has been described as ‘Middle Scots’ and ‘secretary’ hand, in sharp contrast to traditional Classical Gaelic spelling and corra-litir (Meek 1989b: 390). Scholarly debate surrounding the nature and extent of traditional Gaelic scribal activity and literacy in Scotland in the late medieval and early modern period (roughly 1400–1700) has flourished in the interim. It is hoped that this article will provide further impetus to the discussion of the nature of the literacy and literary culture of Gaelic Scots by drawing on the work of these scholars, adding to the debate concerning the nature, extent and status of the literacy and literary activity of Gaelic Scots in Scotland during the period c.1400–1700, by considering the patterns of where people were writing Gaelic in Scotland, with an eye to the usage of Scots orthography to write such Gaelic.
    [Show full text]
  • English Orthography:Its Graphical Structure and Its Relation to Sound
    (QJOLVK2UWKRJUDSK\,WV*UDSKLFDO6WUXFWXUHDQG,WV5HODWLRQWRVRXQG $XWKRU V 5LFKDUG/9HQH]N\ 6RXUFH5HDGLQJ5HVHDUFK4XDUWHUO\9RO1R 6SULQJ SS 3XEOLVKHGE\International Reading Association 6WDEOH85/http://www.jstor.org/stable/747031 . $FFHVVHG Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ira. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. International Reading Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Reading Research Quarterly. http://www.jstor.org English orthography:its graphical structure and its relation to sound RICHARD L. V E N E Z K Y University of Wisconsin PRESENTS AND organizes sets of orthographic patterns, based upon an analysis of the spellings and pronunciations of the 20,000 most common English words.
    [Show full text]
  • Areal Script Form Patterns with Chinese Characteristics James Myers
    Areal script form patterns with Chinese characteristics James Myers National Chung Cheng University http://personal.ccu.edu.tw/~lngmyers/ To appear in Written Language & Literacy This study was made possible through a grant from Taiwan’s Ministry of Science and Technology (103-2410-H-194-119-MY3). Iwano Mariko helped with katakana and Minju Kim with hangul, while Tsung-Ying Chen, Daniel Harbour, Sven Osterkamp, two anonymous reviewers and the special issue editors provided all sorts of useful suggestions as well. Abstract It has often been claimed that writing systems have formal grammars structurally analogous to those of spoken and signed phonology. This paper demonstrates one consequence of this analogy for Chinese script and the writing systems that it has influenced: as with phonology, areal script patterns include the borrowing of formal regularities, not just of formal elements or interpretive functions. Whether particular formal Chinese script regularities were borrowed, modified, or ignored also turns out not to depend on functional typology (in morphemic/syllabic Tangut script, moraic Japanese katakana, and featural/phonemic/syllabic Korean hangul) but on the benefits of making the borrowing system visually distinct from Chinese, the relative productivity of the regularities within Chinese character grammar, and the level at which the borrowing takes place. Keywords: Chinese characters, Tangut script, Japanese katakana, Korean hangul, writing system grammar, script outer form, areal patterns 1. Areal phonological patterns and areal script patterns Sinoform writing systems look Chinese, even when they are functionally quite different. The visual traits of non-logographic Japanese katakana and Korean hangul are nontrivially like those of logographic Chinese script, as are those of the logographic but structurally unique script of Tangut, an extinct Tibeto-Burman language of what is now north-central China.
    [Show full text]
  • Orthographies in Early Modern Europe
    Orthographies in Early Modern Europe Orthographies in Early Modern Europe Edited by Susan Baddeley Anja Voeste De Gruyter Mouton An electronic version of this book is freely available, thanks to the support of libra- ries working with Knowledge Unlatched. KU is a collaborative initiative designed to make high quality books Open Access. More information about the initiative can be found at www.knowledgeunlatched.org An electronic version of this book is freely available, thanks to the support of libra- ries working with Knowledge Unlatched. KU is a collaborative initiative designed to make high quality books Open Access. More information about the initiative can be found at www.knowledgeunlatched.org ISBN 978-3-11-021808-4 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-021809-1 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-021806-2 ISSN 0179-0986 e-ISSN 0179-3256 ThisISBN work 978-3-11-021808-4 is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License, ase-ISBN of February (PDF) 978-3-11-021809-1 23, 2017. For details go to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/. e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-021806-2 LibraryISSN 0179-0986 of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Ae-ISSN CIP catalog 0179-3256 record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. ISBN 978-3-11-028812-4 e-ISBNBibliografische 978-3-11-028817-9 Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliogra- fie;This detaillierte work is licensed bibliografische under the DatenCreative sind Commons im Internet Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs über 3.0 License, Libraryhttp://dnb.dnb.deas of February of Congress 23, 2017.abrufbar.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Orthographic Depth on Learning to Read Alphabetic, Syllabic, and Logographic Scripts
    RRQ4-04 Ellis 9/22/04 11:51 AM Page 438 Reading Research Quarterly Vol. 39, No. 4 October/November/December 2004 © 2004 International Reading Association (pp. 438–468) doi:10.1598/RRQ.39.4.5 The effects of orthographic depth on learning to read alphabetic, syllabic, and logographic scripts NICK C. ELLIS, MIWA NATSUME, KATERINA STAVROPOULOU, LORENC HOXHALLARI, VICTOR H.P. VAN DAAL, NICOLETTA POLYZOE, MARIA-LOUISA TSIPA, MICHALIS PETALAS University of Wales, Bangor, United Kingdom he problem of how to represent spoken language in writing has historically been solved in different ways (Daniels & Bright, 1996; Gaur, 1992). One distinction is whether to “write what you mean” or “write what you say.” Logographic systems such as Chinese and Japanese kanji use symbols to represent meaning directly and have no or comparatively few cues to pronunciation. Other writing systems repre- sent speech sounds. The characters of syllabic systems such as the Japanese kana Tcorrespond with spoken syllables, whereas those of alphabetic systems correspond with separate phonemes. However, alphabetic orthographies vary in the degree to which they are regular in their representation of sound. The writing systems of Serbo-Croatian, Finnish, Welsh, Spanish, Dutch, Turkish, and German are on the whole much more regular in symbol–sound correspondences than those of English and French. The former are referred to as transparent or shallow orthographies in which sound–symbol correspondences are highly consistent, while the latter are re- ferred to as opaque or deep orthographies that are less consistent because each let- ter or group of letters may represent different sounds in different words.
    [Show full text]