This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pitman shorthand article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
I'm only familiar with New Era shorthand and haven't come across the term grammalogue. However, the following sentence from the article is confusing.
"In shorthand, frequently or commonly occurring words are represented in a single outline which are termed as Grammalogues and the shorthand outlines that represent the grammalogues are called logograms."
It seems to be saying that the outline is termed Grammalogue and then that the shorthand outlines that represent grammalogues are called logograms. Can anyone clarify what the writer originally intended? It's not clear whether the outline is the grammalogue or the logogram. Adrian Robson 08:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I would describe this script as an Abugida and not an Abjad. In an Abjad, the vowel symbols are optional, as in Hebrew or Arabic. Andreas (T) 20:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
I read that on the article (second paragraf):
One characteristic feature of Pitman shorthand is that [voiced] sounds (such as /p/ and /b/ or /t/ and /d/)...
I think /p/ and /t/ are voiceless. /b/ and /d/ are surely voiced. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
74.13.203.241 (
talk)
04:04, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
In the UK, the system is known exclusively as Pitman's Shorthand, not Pitman Shorthand. The titles of the (UK editions of the) main reference works refer to Pitman's Shorthand: Pitman's Shorthand Instructor; Pitman's Shorthand Dictionary; A Commentary on Pitman's Shorthand.
The preface of the Instructor states explicitly that the system is known as Pitman's Shorthand (Pitman's Shorthand Instructor New Era Edition, preface, page v) and is similarly described in the preceding Centenary Edition of the Instructor, and before that the Twentieth Century Edition of the Instructor (c.1900). (Before that, the original name of the system, Phonography, was more common.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stenog ( talk • contribs) 10:29, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Footnote 2 suggests that postvocalic R is consistently represented in Pitman's shorthand because "British English" (not a useful term as there were, as now, many regional varieties in Britain) was universally rhotic in the nineteenth century. A more likely reason is that Isaac Pitman was a native of the Bath area, whose local dialect is still rhotic to this day. Independent evidence that Pitman's own pronunciation underpinned the theory comes from the representation of the vowel in the words "bath", "dance" &c., which in editions prior to the Centenary Edition were represented by a first-place ""light"" dot (as is used in the word "cat"), pronunciation typical of many regions of Britain, including the South West, but significantly "excluding" the South East, where "dance" and "bath' &c are characteristically pronounced with the long "ah" (first place ""heavy"" dot). The South Eastern pronunciation became the model from Centenary onwards: specifically Murray's New English Dictionary is cited as the model in the Centenary edition. That the R was retained in outlines, despite the switch to South Eastern pronunciation early in the twentieth century, is open to speculation: the changes to established outlines would be very extensive; the R serves a useful distinguishing function; the R provides a way to represent the vowels of "bird", "court", "hurt" &c., even though they are not rhotic in the Standard pronunciation. Stenog ( talk) 11:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
From the current article:
'Pitman New Era (1922–1975) had the most developed set of rules and abbreviation lists. Pitman 2000 (1975–present) introduced some simplifications and drastically reduced the list of abbreviations to reduce the memory-load..The later versions dropped certain symbols and introduced other simplifications to earlier versions.'
If I go to the trouble to get some references together, as I suppose will be necessary, I think I can substantiate the point that although Pitman 2000 is a simplified version of New Era, it was not intended to replace New Era, and the purpose was not to "improve" New Era. Some outlines are longer, and some joins between strokes are allowed that New Era discourages as being not so easy to form, or less reliable under the stress of speed. But, office workers generally do not need the speed.
There is such a thing as pre-New Era versions. However, a quick check yields that there is a POCKET DICTIONARY NEW ERA – Pitman New Era Shorthand, Publisher Addison Wesley Longman Limited. And this, was first published 1975, reprinted 1985, 86, 87, 88, 90, 92, 93, 96, 97. It is, to my knowledge, still in normal print. DanLanglois ( talk) 02:43, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
The "Writing" section says "Unlike Gregg it is also partly featural, in that pairs of consonsant phonemes distinguished only by voice are notated with strokes differing only in thickness." This seems to contradict the article for featural writing system and Gregg shorthand. Featural writing systems represent the sounds in some way rather than being arbitrary; this is true of both Gregg and Pitman, for Gregg has longer lines corresponding to voiced/unvoiced.
Could anyone check the source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awelotta ( talk • contribs) 14:27, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pitman shorthand article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
I'm only familiar with New Era shorthand and haven't come across the term grammalogue. However, the following sentence from the article is confusing.
"In shorthand, frequently or commonly occurring words are represented in a single outline which are termed as Grammalogues and the shorthand outlines that represent the grammalogues are called logograms."
It seems to be saying that the outline is termed Grammalogue and then that the shorthand outlines that represent grammalogues are called logograms. Can anyone clarify what the writer originally intended? It's not clear whether the outline is the grammalogue or the logogram. Adrian Robson 08:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I would describe this script as an Abugida and not an Abjad. In an Abjad, the vowel symbols are optional, as in Hebrew or Arabic. Andreas (T) 20:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
I read that on the article (second paragraf):
One characteristic feature of Pitman shorthand is that [voiced] sounds (such as /p/ and /b/ or /t/ and /d/)...
I think /p/ and /t/ are voiceless. /b/ and /d/ are surely voiced. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
74.13.203.241 (
talk)
04:04, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
In the UK, the system is known exclusively as Pitman's Shorthand, not Pitman Shorthand. The titles of the (UK editions of the) main reference works refer to Pitman's Shorthand: Pitman's Shorthand Instructor; Pitman's Shorthand Dictionary; A Commentary on Pitman's Shorthand.
The preface of the Instructor states explicitly that the system is known as Pitman's Shorthand (Pitman's Shorthand Instructor New Era Edition, preface, page v) and is similarly described in the preceding Centenary Edition of the Instructor, and before that the Twentieth Century Edition of the Instructor (c.1900). (Before that, the original name of the system, Phonography, was more common.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stenog ( talk • contribs) 10:29, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Footnote 2 suggests that postvocalic R is consistently represented in Pitman's shorthand because "British English" (not a useful term as there were, as now, many regional varieties in Britain) was universally rhotic in the nineteenth century. A more likely reason is that Isaac Pitman was a native of the Bath area, whose local dialect is still rhotic to this day. Independent evidence that Pitman's own pronunciation underpinned the theory comes from the representation of the vowel in the words "bath", "dance" &c., which in editions prior to the Centenary Edition were represented by a first-place ""light"" dot (as is used in the word "cat"), pronunciation typical of many regions of Britain, including the South West, but significantly "excluding" the South East, where "dance" and "bath' &c are characteristically pronounced with the long "ah" (first place ""heavy"" dot). The South Eastern pronunciation became the model from Centenary onwards: specifically Murray's New English Dictionary is cited as the model in the Centenary edition. That the R was retained in outlines, despite the switch to South Eastern pronunciation early in the twentieth century, is open to speculation: the changes to established outlines would be very extensive; the R serves a useful distinguishing function; the R provides a way to represent the vowels of "bird", "court", "hurt" &c., even though they are not rhotic in the Standard pronunciation. Stenog ( talk) 11:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
From the current article:
'Pitman New Era (1922–1975) had the most developed set of rules and abbreviation lists. Pitman 2000 (1975–present) introduced some simplifications and drastically reduced the list of abbreviations to reduce the memory-load..The later versions dropped certain symbols and introduced other simplifications to earlier versions.'
If I go to the trouble to get some references together, as I suppose will be necessary, I think I can substantiate the point that although Pitman 2000 is a simplified version of New Era, it was not intended to replace New Era, and the purpose was not to "improve" New Era. Some outlines are longer, and some joins between strokes are allowed that New Era discourages as being not so easy to form, or less reliable under the stress of speed. But, office workers generally do not need the speed.
There is such a thing as pre-New Era versions. However, a quick check yields that there is a POCKET DICTIONARY NEW ERA – Pitman New Era Shorthand, Publisher Addison Wesley Longman Limited. And this, was first published 1975, reprinted 1985, 86, 87, 88, 90, 92, 93, 96, 97. It is, to my knowledge, still in normal print. DanLanglois ( talk) 02:43, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
The "Writing" section says "Unlike Gregg it is also partly featural, in that pairs of consonsant phonemes distinguished only by voice are notated with strokes differing only in thickness." This seems to contradict the article for featural writing system and Gregg shorthand. Featural writing systems represent the sounds in some way rather than being arbitrary; this is true of both Gregg and Pitman, for Gregg has longer lines corresponding to voiced/unvoiced.
Could anyone check the source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awelotta ( talk • contribs) 14:27, 10 December 2020 (UTC)