Nooalf Discussion

POSTED BY: m52nickerson
UPDATED: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 13:45
VIEWED: 39366
PAGE 12 of 17

I sed try harder not less hard.

All your proclimationz about Nooalf are based on not knowing anything about it.

All your claimz that therez no problem with English are based on willfull ignorance.

I've been thru this before with people who operate mainly by emotion and seem to actively avoid lojik.

This iznt a debate. You are like a delusional skinny nerd who jumps into the boxing ring on amature nite against Mike Tyson. You danse around for about 10 secondz, throwing feeble punchez, get knocked clean out uv the ring and dream that you won, waking up a week later wondering where your prize money iz.

How much time hav you spent on this thred? (Not to mention my time and everybody else who commented or at least red it) You coud hav saved all that time by reading the LoJIK paje. You shoud at least study the chart for 5 minits to avoid making a fool uv yourself.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.nooalf.com

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

So you are back to your "think harder" argument because you are unable to address my points. Nice try.

I have pointed out some phenetic sounds your chart does not have on it. If you thing this is wrong indicate where they are. You could also list the sounds you believe are duplicated on the other charts. If not I will accept your concession.

I doubt there is much logic on your LoJIK page. This might help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic

I would read it if you transcribe it into English.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

How can you point out soundz that arent on the chart if you havent looked at it?

You ask me to transcribe a whole webpaje wen you are too lazy to lift an eyelid to look at anything I'v offered so far?

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.nooalf.com

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Never said I did not look at the chart. I used the chart and compaired it to the other charts to find the sounds missing.

Which you still have not responded to.

The only thing on your site I have not read is the stuff you have in nooalf, like the logic page. I can't read it. If you want me to you will have to transcribe it. If not you are just going to have to make those arguments here.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Then how did you make this mistake:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:

I will give you the "s". That than means you are missing the s sound in pleasure, vision.

---

?

Quote:

---

Your U and R are not equivalent to the "a" sound in away, cinema or the "ur" sound in turn, learn.

---

Yes, they are. You hav a mistaken notion that fonemez are precise, invariable soundz that are clearly described by the IPA system. Actual linguists will tell you otherwize. If you lissin closely to any talking anywhere you may be able to hear all the adjustments, shortcuts, abbreviationz, substitutionz going on, even from the finest speakerz.

There are possibly hundredz uv 'soundz' but wut we hear are definable ranjez, so the question bekumz wut ranjez are heard az particular fonemez, then wich wunz differentiate wordz.

The real reazon you will not read the LoJIK paje iz the fear that you will be able to read it and the cement in your head will crumble away.


----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.nooalf.com

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:
Yes, they are. You hav a mistaken notion that fonemez are precise, invariable soundz that are clearly described by the IPA system. Actual linguists will tell you otherwize. If you lissin closely to any talking anywhere you may be able to hear all the adjustments, shortcuts, abbreviationz, substitutionz going on, even from the finest speakerz.

---

They are missing you tin eared dolt. If you say they are not missing what sounds on the IPA chart are unneeded or repeated?

You claim linguists would say different, that sounds are not that well defined. I say, citation needed.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:There are possibly hundredz uv 'soundz' but wut we hear are definable ranjez, so the question bekumz wut ranjez are heard az particular fonemez, then wich wunz differentiate wordz.

---

If there are hundred of possible sounds nooalf is even farther off. I have also provided citations for the heard phonics.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:The real reazon you will not read the LoJIK paje iz the fear that you will be able to read it and the cement in your head will crumble away.

---

The real reason you won't transcribe it is because you know I will pick it apart just like I have your arguments here.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:
They are missing, you tin eared dolt. If you say they are not missing what sounds on the IPA chart are unneeded or repeated?

---

Jezus sed sumthing about speaking to people in their own lingo, so to help you understand, I will go with your gratuitous pervasive insult style.

If I went with the simplified IPA chart, the next doj you woud take if you had at least average intellijens woud be to claim I wuz failing to understand linguistics. So, to hopefully save still more useless repetition, get the chart on this paje lined up in front of your bulbous gnarly noze, drag your puffy red flaky skin eylidz off uv your bludshot eyez, pour sum caffiene into your mostly empty skull and slosh it around to get your rented rat brain started and study this calamitously disjointed mess for az long az it takes to get the general idea.
[url] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Phonetic_Alphabet_chart_for
_English_dialects[/url]

Hopefully, you will be able to get your Windows 3.1 based OS to chug along at a blazing fast 30 MHz and the Internet Explorer v1.2.0 to show 2 webpajez at the same time!!! in order to switch back and forth between this and the Wiki paje.

You will note that they hav at least 52 general entryz not counting the marginal sound(?) and reduced vowelz, so lets subtract from there.

We will go by the sample wordz.

On the left hand chart for consonants, chowderhed, there are 26 entries.

1. 'loch' iz certainly a sound worthy of a letter, but its not really English, especially not American.
2. 'ng' like in thing and pink is well within the 'n' range we hear. If linguists are discussing detailz uv speech, yes, having a letter for it iz handy, but for everybody else, the distiction iz useless. We dont need to know how a sound iz formed.
3. run, very. R iz a vowel. Not that it matterz in Nooalf.
4. hw like in what. Obviously to anybody with a complete brain, this iz 2 soundz and obviously, left to rite order iz being violated in all the wordz that hav this. If you ever paid any attention, you also woud hav noticed that most people dont say the H.

In the larjr left side uv the chart, wich seemz to be a little hezitant in differentiating sum uv the 'diaphonemes' there are sumwer between 26 and 37 entryz:
5. father, palm. No difference from off, on loss; at least not in American and even in some British dialects you woudnt notice any difference in regular speech. There are zero word distinctions no matter wut dialect.
6. comma, about. The so called 'schwa' iz U like in up, dump, ugly chump. The use uv A in spelling seemz to mislead people into believing its sumthing else. With a decent music editing program, you can clip the sound out uv theze wordz and plug them into the alternately spelled wordz and hear for yourself, O great golden eared wun.
7. spotted? They hav a lower case i with a horizontal line thru the middle. I'm gesssing its the 'shwi' I'v seen sum blathering about over the last 10 yirz. Another mistake based on spelling.
8.city, fleece, meat. They have i and i: for theze 3. Wake up. E iz E.
9. burn, winner. they hav 2 different digrafs for this. Altho I hav to giv credit for them finally figuring out that R iz a vowel, they failed to distinguish the 2 formz with the sample wrdz here and in the consonant section. Not that you hav a chance uv understanding this.
10. cute, yew. They uze ju: for this. Now this I woud expect even you to be able to hear iz 2 soundz Y like in yes and OO like in moon. C'mon! seriously, you cant?!
11. boy, hoist. Same here! O and E ! 2 soundz.
12. now, trout. And here! o and W ! they are using digraphs for theze, so I think maybe they realize its 2 soundz, but then wuz up with the chart?
13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 are all clear demonstrationz that R confuzez the krap out uv the linguist's il concieved lojik.

So we hav 52+ minus 19. Let me get a calculator.
Hmm. its showing 33. A minimum number.

Seriously, thats odd

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:
1. 'loch' iz certainly a sound worthy of a letter, but its not really English, especially not American.

---

On a chart of English sounds but not really English? HAHAHAHAAH! Also American pronunciations are not the correct or default ones. It also means there will be a gap in your system for native of Scotland.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:2. 'ng' like in thing and pink is well within the 'n' range we hear. If linguists are discussing detailz uv speech, yes, having a letter for it iz handy, but for everybody else, the distiction iz useless. We dont need to know how a sound iz formed.

---

There is a slight difference, but a slight difference means a difference. This would also be more pronounced in an Australian dialect.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:4. hw like in what. Obviously to anybody with a complete brain, this iz 2 soundz and obviously, left to rite order iz being violated in all the wordz that hav this. If you ever paid any attention, you also woud hav noticed that most people dont say the H.

---

Well except for those who have studied such things and are linguists. Also clear to me that it is not 2 sounds and is distinct from a "w" sound.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:5. father, palm. No difference from off, on loss; at least not in American and even in some British dialects you woudnt notice any difference in regular speech. There are zero word distinctions no matter wut dialect.

---

Do you have a speech impediment? You can hear a difference and in saying the two you can feel a difference.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:6. comma, about. The so called 'schwa' iz U like in up, dump, ugly chump. The use uv A in spelling seemz to mislead people into believing its sumthing else. With a decent music editing program, you can clip the sound out uv theze wordz and plug them into the alternately spelled wordz and hear for yourself, O great golden eared wun.

---

Don't need a music program. If you can't hear the difference in the beginning sound of "about" and "ugly" I'm sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:7. spotted? They hav a lower case i with a horizontal line thru the middle. I'm gesssing its the 'shwi' I'v seen sum blathering about over the last 10 yirz. Another mistake based on spelling.

---

This is getting repetitive as all you are offering is your opinion, bias as it is, verses a ton of referenced material.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:8.city, fleece, meat. They have i and i: for theze 3. Wake up. E iz E.

---

Yes, in the US not everywhere.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:9. burn, winner. they hav 2 different digrafs for this. Altho I hav to giv credit for them finally figuring out that R iz a vowel, they failed to distinguish the 2 formz with the sample wrdz here and in the consonant section. Not that you hav a chance uv understanding this.

---

They as in the ones that know what they are talking about? Yes they has two, because there are two slightly different sounds. Also the R sound at the beginning of rabbit is not close to the same sound as the end of spider.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:10. cute, yew. They uze ju: for this. Now this I woud expect even you to be able to hear iz 2 soundz Y like in yes and OO like in moon. C'mon! seriously, you cant?!

---

Starting to think you don't understand what constitutes a sound.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:11. boy, hoist. Same here! O and E ! 2 soundz.

---

Here is more evidence.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:12. now, trout. And here! o and W ! they are using digraphs for theze, so I think maybe they realize its 2 soundz, but then wuz up with the chart?

---

Yup, you don't understand what a sound is.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JO753:13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 are all clear demonstrationz th

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME