quinterbeck wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 2:26 am
The Thai script is correct, however some of the transcribed output words do not have the tones I would expect (from learning modern Thai). I'm assuming the tones of modern Thai are what's intended, and mid tone does not occur in stop-final syllables. What are you verifying the outputs against?
ʔi̯et → ʔēt [เอ็ด ‘one’] -- should be ʔèt (low tone)
dlək → lāk [ลัก ‘steal’] -- should be lák (high tone)
muək → mūuk [มูก ‘mucus’] -- should be mûuk (falling tone)
Ah, good catch! But when I re-run it, these do have the correct tones. It appears that I accidentally used an outdated version of the program when I copied those results over.
The actual results (using the correct version of the software) are:
bradrn wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 8:42 pm
Richard, could you double-check that the Thai script is correct? Then this should be ready to add to Brassica’s set of examples.
The Thai script for these words is OK.
bradrn wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 8:42 pm
(Yes, I know the transcription is somewhat eccentric, but honestly I can’t find one that isn’t, so I thought I might as well stick with Li’s.)
But your choice of symbol for the high back unrounded vowel for an IPA-capable system is perverse, and has rendering problems when an accent is placed on it.
bradrn wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 8:42 pm
(Yes, I know the transcription is somewhat eccentric, but honestly I can’t find one that isn’t, so I thought I might as well stick with Li’s.)
But your choice of symbol for the high back unrounded vowel for an IPA-capable system is perverse, and has rendering problems when an accent is placed on it.
It is perverse, I completely agree. But this is what Li used, and its interpretation puzzled me enough that I decided not to change it.
(it's not like other sources are much better, anyway. SEAlang seems to call it /ʉ/!)