Heill Keth,

Well, thanks for at least being the only one who comments on
anything :)

Ok, I'll say straight-away that I disagree with your suggestions; the
reason is, however simpler using your "phonetic alphabet" (I'd rather
call it "approximation alphabet"), it's way inaccurate for the
phonetication of Old Norse, or in fact any language other than
English.

It's logical, you see, if you think about it: How can a system that
refers exclusively to the sounds of one language, appropriately
describe sounds that don't exist in that language of reference?

Take for instance some of your examples:

> Example of use (arbitrarily chosen):
> Chá-vez (ch a4' v a2 s) Carlos. Born 1899. Mexican composer,
> conductor and educator.
>
> If you go to the table you will see that a4 = <the a of fAther>
> and a2 = <the a of pAY>

That would yield something that I know you'd instantly brand as a
horrible English accent! In "standard" Spanish (let's say
Mexican), 'Chávez' is pronounced (using IPA) ['tSABes], AFAIK; using
this system, we'd make out ['t^hSAveIz], certainly not like any form
of Spanish existing. Using only English approximations, we'll never
be speaking anything but "debased English", instead of Old Norse or
Spanish or whatever.

I think in the end you don't actually agree with what you're
suggesting (I know this seems like an arrogant assertion, sorry) -
because I know you're a man of languages who doesn't care for mangled
accents; but that's what using a system of approximations like this
will yield, and nothing else.

The phonetic system that I use is a computerized representation of
the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). IPA is universally
recognized and used by linguists around the world. IPA attempts to
provide writeable symbols for each and every identifiable sound ever
used in speech. If you look at an IPA chart, you'll see the wildest
sounds and combinations of sounds, ones you've never imagined or even
heard. A vast amount of different sounds are in active use in the
world's 8000 (or so) languages. To ever attempt to scientifically
identify those sounds, no approximation tagged to a specific language
will ever do the trick.

SAMPA, the alphabet that I consistently use, is then just a
conversion of IPA into symbols easily produced by English keyboards.
Don't consider it a system of its own, it's essentially IPA.

I recommend to you, Keth, that you read a bit about phonetics and
phonetic transcription. It's a friendly recommendation, really, for I
think you'd enjoy it once you'd get into it. I once used to disdain
phonetics and thought, "I know lots of languages, I can always just
approximate to sounds I know...". But once I studied some phonetics
by myself and learned to use IPA, I realized that I was wrong; sounds
that I thought the same are actually different, and sounds I thought
different are the same. It surprised me how little I had known about
the phonetic structure of the languages I spoke (even my native
one!).

Besides, it's very practical when accessing academic information on
the subject; it allows me to "cut the crap" when reading through
pronunciation guide, provided they have IPA.

Anyway, keep commenting, it's useful for us all :)

Óskar

- "Language is like high-tech machinery; always used, seldom
understood."