DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Phanny, v. 3, issue 3, December 1944

Transcribe
Translate

Phanny, v. 3, issue 3, December 1944

Page 14

14                 P H A N N Y              14
______________________________

   Your comments on the race question as discussed in Black and White, taken together with Chauvenet's, just about wind up the case to the satisfaction of everybody, I should think, excepting of course, Speer, and probably Searles. --  Since I generally like polls, this was was enjoyed, too; evidently, though, a considerable number of members don't share my interest there.
   "Shortype," in my opinion, is not as good as it might be. I didn't find it particularly difficult to read, partly because I once knew shorthand fairly well, in addition to using an abbreviated alphabetic system of my own, as mentioned previously; and partly because there is actually very little abbreviating, even many long words being spelled out in full.
   Your trouble lay, I think, in your attempt to do two divergent things; (1) to produce a phonetic alphabet for English, using typewriter symbols; and (2) create a system of shorthand adapted to that same set of tyewriter characters. You failed in the first, because you just didn't use enough different characters to represent all the sounds. You failed in the second because; (a) you use too many different characters which have the value of one sound, and one only; and (b) you do not have a general principle of abbreviation for long words; (c) you do not use nearly enough single-character symbols to represent frequently-occurring letter groups, especially prefixes and suffixes; and (d) you utilize too few of the characters on the key-board.
   Your two aims are not easily combined. If you want a phonetic alphabet, then you will have some forty-odd characters, and will naturally use upper-case forms to represent part of the sounds, especially in the case of vowels. Every symbol would represent one and only one sound, and every sound would have its unique symbol. You would eliminate such monstrosities as "ae" for the long sound of "a" and "oo" for the vowel sound in "hood." You would use two symbols for a diphthong. You would have single characters for not only sh an ch, but also for the two sounds of th, etc. Probably such a system would take longer to type, because of much shifting, but it would be phonetics.
   If you want to work up a shorthand system, you start out differently. In particular, you would drop minor differences, such as distinguishing between the various sounds of a given vowel, and use only one symbol to represent the group of sounds s, x, and z. Let's use x for th (ok, Harry?) and tackle a few words, starting with"anthropologist," which in "shortype" is shortened to "anthro0p0lojist". I'd use something like nxp0L[?]; it would also do for "anthropology," since context would tell which was meant. "Analogy" would become n0L; "theology," x0L. (Note; in using  symbols involving two consecutive caps, care should be taken so that both caps were struck with the fingers of the same hand, so as to eliminate excessive shifting). For -ility,-illy,-ality,-ally, I would use L; thus: "personally," or "personality"; prsL. "Trivial," trvl; "trivially,"triviality," trvL. Similarly, "unanimous," nnms; "unanimity," nnM; "calamity," klM; "proximity," prsM; "simple," or "sample," sP, "simplicity," sPS or smpS, the second form avoiding the double shift. "City," S; "perspic[?]ity," prpkS. Well, that is enough to show you what I mean by really short "shortype." You can get the general principals out of the back half of your Gregg shorthand text; it might help to consult one or more of the "simple" or "alphabetic" shorthand texts, too.
   After all of which, I still think you can't shorten typing sufficiently by any such means to make it worth while as a time-saver, mainly because you have to strike the space-bar after every word; and, whereas it is only about twenty-per-cent of the stroking in ordinary typing, it becomes greater in proportion as the words shorten, so that you quickly reach the limit.
BANSHEE #6 (B+) Not up to #5, but that could hardly be expected; this is still among the best in the Mailing. The top item, undoubtedly, is Spencer's enthusiastic write-up of his visit to Slan-Shack; he fairly effervesces. His comments on the mailing were also good, although I admit I was a little disappointed to find that the best PHANNY to date was among the "one or two items which did not impress....one way or the other." Spencer and Wollheim!
   "Thunder from Atlas" is Speer unadulterated, and I always like to read Speer, even though I frequently disagree rather violently with his views.

Saving...

14 P H A N N Y 14 ______________________________ Your comments on the race question as discussed in Black and White, taken together with Chauvenet's, just about wind up the case to the satisfaction of everybody, I should think, excepting of course, Speer, and probably Searles. -- Since I generally like polls, this was was enjoyed, too; evidently, though, a considerable number of members don't share my interest there. "Shortype," in my opinion, is not as good as it might be. I didn't find it particularly difficult to read, partly because I once knew shorthand fairly well, in addition to using an abbreviated alphabetic system of my own, as mentioned previously; and partly because there is actually very little abbreviating, even many long words being spelled out in full. Your trouble lay, I think, in your attempt to do two divergent things; (1) to produce a phonetic alphabet for English, using typewriter symbols; and (2) create a system of shorthand adapted to that same set of tyewriter characters. You failed in the first, because you just didn't use enough different characters to represent all the sounds. You failed in the second because; (a) you use too many different characters which have the value of one sound, and one only; and (b) you do not have a general principle of abbreviation for long words; (c) you do not use nearly enough single-character symbols to represent frequently-occurring letter groups, especially prefixes and suffixes; and (d) you utilize too few of the characters on the key-board. Your two aims are not easily combined. If you want a phonetic alphabet, then you will have some forty-odd characters, and will naturally use upper-case forms to represent part of the sounds, especially in the case of vowels. Every symbol would represent one and only one sound, and every sound would have its unique symbol. You would eliminate such monstrosities as "ae" for the long sound of "a" and "oo" for the vowel sound in "hood." You would use two symbols for a diphthong. You would have single characters for not only sh an ch, but also for the two sounds of th, etc. Probably such a system would take longer to type, because of much shifting, but it would be phonetics. If you want to work up a shorthand system, you start out differently. In particular, you would drop minor differences, such as distinguishing between the various sounds of a given vowel, and use only one symbol to represent the group of sounds s, x, and z. Let's use x for th (ok, Harry?) and tackle a few words, starting with"anthropologist," which in "shortype" is shortened to "anthro0p0lojist". I'd use something like nxp0L[?]; it would also do for "anthropology," since context would tell which was meant. "Analogy" would become n0L; "theology," x0L. (Note; in using symbols involving two consecutive caps, care should be taken so that both caps were struck with the fingers of the same hand, so as to eliminate excessive shifting). For -ility,-illy,-ality,-ally, I would use L; thus: "personally," or "personality"; prsL. "Trivial," trvl; "trivially,"triviality," trvL. Similarly, "unanimous," nnms; "unanimity," nnM; "calamity," klM; "proximity," prsM; "simple," or "sample," sP, "simplicity," sPS or smpS, the second form avoiding the double shift. "City," S; "perspic[?]ity," prpkS. Well, that is enough to show you what I mean by really short "shortype." You can get the general principals out of the back half of your Gregg shorthand text; it might help to consult one or more of the "simple" or "alphabetic" shorthand texts, too. After all of which, I still think you can't shorten typing sufficiently by any such means to make it worth while as a time-saver, mainly because you have to strike the space-bar after every word; and, whereas it is only about twenty-per-cent of the stroking in ordinary typing, it becomes greater in proportion as the words shorten, so that you quickly reach the limit. BANSHEE #6 (B+) Not up to #5, but that could hardly be expected; this is still among the best in the Mailing. The top item, undoubtedly, is Spencer's enthusiastic write-up of his visit to Slan-Shack; he fairly effervesces. His comments on the mailing were also good, although I admit I was a little disappointed to find that the best PHANNY to date was among the "one or two items which did not impress....one way or the other." Spencer and Wollheim! "Thunder from Atlas" is Speer unadulterated, and I always like to read Speer, even though I frequently disagree rather violently with his views.