protocols
                
                                                            
                    
2016-07-01
 discussion about better organziation of the development
 
 idea to use GoogleDocs or Etherpads as some kind of protocol to summarize the thoughts, findings and decisions
 
 the protocols should be copied to the Wiki regularly
 
 
2016-07-08
 idea to create a list with habitual expressions
 
 discussion about /x/ … again :)
 examples
 [pg] nahts
 [de] Nacht (/x/)
 
 [en] night (|:|)
 
 [nb] natt
 
 
 [pg] mahtiz
 [de] Macht (/x/)
 
 [en] might (|:|)
 
 [nb] makt
 
 
 [pg] hlahjaną
 [de] lachen (/x/)
 
 [en] laugh (/f/)
 
 [nb] le
 
 
 [pg] þauh
 
 [pg] fehtaną
 [de] fechten (/ç/)
 
 [en] fight (|:|)
 
 [nb] fekte
 
 
 [pg] rehtaz
 [de] recht (/ç/)
 
 [en] right (|:|)
 
 [nb] rett
 
 
 [pg] sehwaną (not for sure that this was spoken with [x])
 [de] sehen
 
 [en] see
 
 [nb] se
 
 
 [pg] skehaną
 [de] geschehen, schicken
 
 [en] –
 
 [nb] skje
 
 
 [pg] leuhtą
 [de] Licht (/ç/)
 
 [en] light (|:|)
 
 [nb] (no descendent)
 
 
 [pg] sihtiz
 [de] Sicht (/ç/)
 
 [en] sight (|:|)
 
 [nb] sikt
 
 
 [pg] slihtaz
 [de] schlecht (/ç/)
 
 [en] slight (|:|)
 
 [nb] slett
 
 
 [pg] hauhaz
 [de] hoch (/χ/)
 
 [en] high (|:|)
 
 [nb] høy (–)
 
 
 [pg] rūhwaz
 [de] rau(h) (–)
 
 [en] rough (/f/)
 
 [nb] (no descendent)
 
 
 properties
 
 neutral
 
 pros
 sometimes it is very hard to find a proper replacement
 
 „it's vital to distinguish a lot of words and it's beneficial for ppl who want to look at English, German and Scots at least“ -* RayZa
 
It'll sound cooler and more Germanic :P
 very subjective (and certainly not to those Germanic speakers who don't have it in their mother tongue, e.g. Norwegians, Swedes, …)
 
 
 
 cons
 not all Germanic languages have a sound like that
 
 inconsistencies
 German: [ç] is an allophone and the pronunciation of “ch” depends on the vowel before (not in all varieties though)
 
 English: the pronunciation in the descendent words varies and is very different from [x]: |ː|, [f], …
 
 
 written representation not easy
 
 maybe hard to produce and cause ambiguity if parties pronounce or perceive /x/ wrongly.
 
 the amount of affected words is relatively small and therefore hardly justifies the introduction of the sound
 
 
 options
 
 exclusion
 
 inclusion
 representing it with an unused letter, e.g. “c”, “x” or “q”
 would keep the good orthography/phonology-mapping
 
 since these letters often have no canonic/regular pronunciation in the Germanic languages, the chance is, that people stop reading when encountering one of these letters and find out what it is instead of just listening to “the little kobold/goblin in the head”, who claims to know what it is :)
 while possibly not considered “part of the language” there are rules for those letters at least in German anyway as they are considered Latinicisms c (not before e or i) = /k/, c (before e or i) = /ts/, x = /ks, q (especially before u) = /k/
 
 
 is unconventional
 
 people may pronounce it wrongly by 'intuition'
 
 people might be repulsed by the “un-Germanicness” of it and deem FS not Germanic enough for what it strives to be
 
 
 representing it with “h”
 breaks the mapping
 
 creates ambiguities
 
 
 representing it with a digraph like  “gh”, “ch”, “kh” or “hh”
  “gh”, “ch”, “kh”
 these digraphs are used by modern Germanic languages (not only Germanic) and are thus more understandable than a priori solutions like “hh” or “x”
 
 for those digraphs () ppl might automagically fall back to /g/ and /k/ if they don't know it's supposed to be pronounced /x/ or if they can't produce the sound naturally
 English speakers might realize “gh” as abstract vowel lengthening (|:|), resulting in modern “long vowels” (like /aɪ/ or /oʊ/: sight, though) or as [f]
 
 Non-Scottish English speakers might pronounce “ch” /tʃ/
 
 partially holds for “c” too 
 
 
 
 “hh”
 
 
 
 further thoughts
 
 „i guess a good step now would be to make experiments; producing small texts while [x] is included; then we can compare the texts, how they look like with the different writings for [x], and assess if [x] is necessary at all“ -* fenris
- 
 „De romanisk skechrid-skrivar Jordanes giv en viktig kveldung fur vetrid um de Gotisk maner ine fra sin buk “Getica”, vilk ar en halv-utdenkt fratelung, skrivt po de sekst hundredjar. Jordanes beskriv de vanderrid av de Gotisk fra süd-“Scandza” (Skandinavia) to “Gothiscandza” — man tru, at dis ar de ned arend “Vistula”-landsdel ine fra de disdagig Pomerania — and fra dar to de küst av de svart sö. Utgravunger fra Pomeranisk “Wielbark”-folk and de “Chernyakhov”-folk, nord-öst fra de ned arend Danuv, vis, at solk en vanderrid skechde santhedig. […]“
 
 
 
 
 
 discussion about personal pronouns and their derived forms
 
 
2017-02-05
2017-05-04
2017-07-27
 idea of a regular appointment in the 
IRC channel to discuss stuff
 
 
 
2017-10-29
                    
                                     
                protocols.txt · Last modified: 2017/10/31 22:49 by rayza