Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Devoted to publicizing and improving the Nearly Anacrophonic Phonetic Alphabet (NAPA).
What is the NAPA?
Get the complete story from the NAPA home page.
What counts as a word?
Words should be entries in the OED not marked as foreign or obsolete. For more information, see the NAPA design page.
The NAPA in brief
Sign the guestbook
Sign the NAPA guestbook by leaving a comment on the guestbook post.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(29)
-
▼
September
(28)
- Introducing the NAPA
- Guestbook
- The letter A
- The letter B
- The letter C
- The letter D
- The letter E
- The letter F
- The letter G
- The letter H
- The letter I
- The letter J
- The letter K
- The letter L
- The letter M
- The letter N
- The letter O
- The letter P
- The letter Q
- The letter R
- The letter S
- The letter T
- The letter U
- The letter V
- The letter W
- The letter X
- The letter Y
- The letter Z
-
▼
September
(28)
About Me
- Everett Howe
- San Diego, California, United States
- Professional mathematician, amateur curmudgeon.
Looks like I'm going to be the first commenter. NAPA seems very, very interesting. I've read nearly everything from your website(s) and webpages about it. One problem: *why* would you yourselves need to build an anacrophonic phonetic alphabet? Right now, your aim is presented like a fait accompli, and I shouldn't think that's going to cut it even with the interested. Any chance of that please? Thanks and cheers from Hong Kong, Robert.
ReplyDeleteI would offer the following alternatives:
ReplyDeleteFor "fantasm" I would suggest "f". It is pronounced "eff" which makes it less phonetic than "fantasm." And you can find "f" in both OED and Webster.
Similarly for "rath" I would substitute "r" using the same reasoning.
This may appear to violate the purpose of a spelling alphabet. But isn't that what makes an anacrophonetic alphabet so attractive in the first place?