Date
1 - 19 of 19
Practicing both Shavian and Quikscript | Corresponding in QS
|
Brad Neil
On Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 11:22 AM, Peter wrote:
Other etiquette ideas for corresponding, whether on-list or off-list:I meant to add: I think those are both very good ideas. If it's a geniune mistake, then anyone (including the author) can see that; meanwhile, differences of opinion on spelling are just that. |
|
|
|
Brad Neil
(I should get a better pen before we actually kick off the writing circle...)That looks perfectly fine! I thought I might as well use my nicest pen just for the sake of it. But if it does the job, it's all you need. I didn't mean to imply that I'm a writing-implement snob, which certainly isn't the case :-) I doubt that people will be sharing that type of sensitive information in a chain letter format in any event. I come from a younger generation which, in my experience, generally values some level of anonymity when interacting with others onlineI agree with both of these sentiments. I suppose none of us know each other well enough to get into really personal or sensitive topics, and anything like that doesn't need to be said in any case. I see Moira has taken the initiave of kicking things off in another thread - I'll write a reply to that when I get the chance, probably later tonight or tomorrow. |
|
|
|
Peter
Valid points, Paige. I come from a younger generation which, in my experience, generally values some level of anonymity when interacting with others online, since the technology allows it. That's why I mentioned the example of one's city of residence as private information. (It can be argued how important it is on a practical level to actually keep such information private, but that's a different topic. As you said, people did write letters to "strangers" in the past.)
There's also an argument to be made that the chain letter, being more like casual conversation (as I imagine it), is inherently of a more private nature, and therefore not suited to be preserved on the Internet "forever," even if the actual topics are not particularly private or sensitive. This is opposed to the other topics I've seen on this mailing list, which all seem to be specific and often technical discussion of QS itself. Having said all this – I'm certainly open to having the chain letter be completely public on this list, for the advantageous reasons already mentioned. I'm just elaborating on my own perspective for the sake of being thorough. |
|
|
|
Paige
I think people get carried away with a perceived need for privacy
these days. It's not as if we are likely to be discussing our
health care with others on the list. I think most people
understand what is truly private versus common information that
the majority of people of are not overly concerned about others
knowing. I doubt that people will be sharing that type of
sensitive information in a chain letter format in any event. For example, the city or state you live in hardly seems
confidential to me. Back when people sent actual letters, they
routinely included their return address (an actual address, Oh
my!) on an envelope that the postman could see. I do not think we
should have to worry about obtaining a release on this type of
"personal" information. Other than that, this chain letter, which revives what Read did decades ago, will provide a number of benefits for all of us interested in using QS effectively in our lives. Paige Gabhart
On 9/18/2022 2:22 PM, Peter wrote:
|
|
|
|
Peter
 (I should get a better pen before we actually kick off the writing circle...) From where I stand, here are pros to corresponding on-list:
And here's a con to corresponding on-list:
I lean towards corresponding OFF-list for the privacy element – but I also think it's valuable to make it known that a writing circle does exist. I suggest making a post announcing such once the kickoff happens. That way, if others are interested down the line, they can comment on that post and get looped in. For the archival element: I think individuals could upload their own letters to the file repository if they desire, while respecting consent of others who may have been mentioned in their letter. For instance, if X says (in "private") that they live in Seattle, and Y responds, "Oh, X, I also live in Seattle!" then Y shouldn't share that correspondence publicly unless there's consent. Other etiquette ideas for corresponding, whether on-list or off-list: - after initial kickoff, anybody can respond to any message in any order - do not provide minor spelling corrections to another person's writing unless the author has "opted in" to being corrected; however, do ask for clarification if you have trouble reading something they wrote Thoughts? |
|
|
|
Brad Neil
Kiel Ido plibonigis Esperanton? Ido failed bacause people realized its reforms were not really improvements.Admittedly, I know next to nothing about Esperanto and Ido. I assumed (a classic blunder) Ido must have been an improvement in order to gain as much traction as it has (seeing as I've heard of it, despite never looking into it myself), which would have made it more analogous to the Shavian/Quikscript situation. I stand corrected then! Anyway, not to get too sidetracked... I'm sure you get the point I was trying to make: being arguably a mere offshoot, QS will probably always remain more obscure. But it's also arguable that QS is the true, final form of Shavian and one day the world may come to believe that. Who knows? I'd like to help kickstart actual in-Quikscript correspondence, but I'm a comically awful party/conversation starter. If someone else starts the opening letter, I'd love to join in.  I think it's been about 5 years since I used my fountain pen. It takes some getting used to! But it shows up in scans better than pencil, and just about anything looks better than ballpoint. |
|
|
|
Ph.D.
Kiel Ido plibonigis Esperanton? Ido failed bacause people realized
its reforms were not really improvements.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 9/17/2022 2:08 AM, Brad Neil via
groups.io wrote:
But unfortunately for us, QS is to Shavian as Ido is to Esperanto... much improved, but will likely never achieve the same level of popularity. |
|
|
|
BP Jonsson
I don't use Shavian although I mostly can read it. OTOH I also read and write Melin's Swedish Shorthand, including my adaptation of it to English, as well as my adaptation of QS to Swedish, and I have some knowledge (tho no fluency) in Gregg's shorthand for English. To tell the truth I prefer shorthand for writing and QS for reading, which is an unsolvable situation! :-) That said it is both true that shorthand is far from write-only, and QS is much better for writing than longhand/Orthodox, so I will mostly choose between shorthand/QS/typing longhand on a need-for-speed basis, since shorthand wins and typing/longhand loses hands down when it comes to writing speed while the reverse is true for reading speed, with QS occupying the sweet spot in the middle for both. Of course it matters that shorthand had a 15–20 year head start over QS; I was already fluent in shorthand when I discovered QS. I knew about Shavian before that, but unlike QS I didn't feel comfortable with Shavian. As for learning/using QS and Shavian in parallel I guess there is some room for confusion. It is a bit like Latin and Cyrillic, but worse because QS/Shavian are used for the same language. When encountering a word written in Cyrillic in the middle of a Latin text or vice versa, I sometimes get confused, especially if the word begins with two letters which are false friends like ca/са or py/ру, which is why I always italicize/underline/parenthesize words in the other script when writing myself, as when signing "Б.Ф. Юнссон (B.P. Jonsson)" (or the reverse, since people seeing the Latin spelling of my surname usually think it should be _Джонсон_ in Cyrillic. :-) It is no problem with a text which uses only one or the other script. I guess it would ultimately be the same with QS/Shavian if I became more fluent in Shavian (or both, since these days I tend to just type longhand/Orthodox on my phone! :-/) Unfortunately italicization isn't an option with QS (or shorthand!) but I guess that regular QS vs upright Shavian might have the same effect. Den fre 16 sep. 2022 21:36Peter <pedrocottontail@...> skrev: Hi all, |
|
|
|
Nathan Galt
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 12:36 PM, Peter wrote:
If there is, I'm not aware of one.
"write on paper, scan it (or just take a picture of it with your phone), and send it" is probably the best and easiest way I can think of to get Senior in front of other people. "type it out, then print to PDF" is also an option. This won't get anybody Senior unless someone's been sitting on a font with Pecita (http://pecita.eu/)-tier substitutions, but if you'd rather type, it's an option. I don't have anything bad to say about typing it out, then generating an image from it, although my hunch is that it's going to be needlessly annoying to typeset and nobody — not even Apple-product users with Apple Silicon chips — will be able to copy and paste the text into something else. You could also have a website in Quikscript. https://www.quikscript.net/on-the-web/ should show you what you need to do to get Quikscript on a Web page, although it assumes you know how to write basic HTML and CSS already and get the HTML up on a server you control somewhere. If you're not quite there yet and want to learn, ask on the list and I'll help you out. Also, my explanations for these sorts of things tend to be terse to the point of telepathic; if I've glossed over something that's important that you don't understand, that's most likely me not explaining things well enough. You'd be doing other potential Quikscript writers a favor by helping debug explanatory documentation. I'd like to help kickstart actual in-Quikscript correspondence, but I'm a comically awful party/conversation starter. If someone else starts the opening letter, I'd love to join in. I have a weak preference to keep the letter writing on-list for archival purposes, although I can definitely think of very, very good reasons for keeping it all off-list. I'm happy to do either, or even both. |
|
|
|
Nathan Galt
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 12:36 PM, Peter wrote:
I got okay with Shavian a while back, although I'm not all that fast in reading it (not that I'm fast at reading Quikscript, anyway). The ·ado/·up separation is yet another vowel thing that I can't wrap my head around easily, and refused to even try. On the other hand, Quikscript's split of ·woe into ·way and ·why doesn't trip me up even though I'm in wine–whine merger territory because /ʍ/ is reliably spelled with a "wh", as far as I can tell. The attached picture shows what I was willing to do to try and fit in in a Shavian community, although I didn't stick around. |
|
|
|
Brad Neil
I taught myself Quikscript in 2014, when I was supposed to be studying during my final year of high school. Then in 2019, I bought a copy of Androcles and the Lion on eBay and learnt to read Shavian too, mostly so I had a better knowledge of QS's historical background (and so I could scan it and put it on my website!). I don't handwrite Shavian, as QS is indeed obviously superior for that, but I try to maintain a good reading ability in both. The support for Shavian in Unicode and system fonts is a very nice bonus. But unfortunately for us, QS is to Shavian as Ido is to Esperanto... much improved, but will likely never achieve the same level of popularity.
I would be interested in corresponding in QS with folks here if others are :-) |
|
|
|
Peter
Oh, of course – that didn't occur to me earlier for some reason. I'll blame post-nap brain! Benjamin, I'll allow some time for others to potentially express interest in correspondence, but I'm glad to hear that you're interested. On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 7:21 PM Benjamin Bruce <benjamin@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Benjamin Bruce
I knew it probably wouldn't render in anyone's email, but I also knew that those who were curious enough to find out what it says would copy and paste it into another application to read it with a QS font 😜 Ipan ne 16 tonal tlen metstli 09 tlen xiwitl 2022, ipan 18:26 kawitl, Peter <pedrocottontail@...> kiihkwilo:
|
|
|
|
Peter
Benjamin, I'm not sure if this was intentional on your part, but the sentence after the Shavian rendered as missing-glyph gibberish for me – seems like it could serve to illustrate the usefulness of Shavian's Unicode support! :) On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 4:48 PM Benjamin Bruce <benjamin@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Benjamin Bruce
I have never used Shavian in handwriting, but I did have a stint awhile back where I tried using it on my devices for the reason of Unicode support that you mentioned. However I gave it up because my brain kept getting confused (especially with mime and nun). Now I'm back to just using QS. I have often puzzled over Shavian's relative popularity--𐑢𐑲 𐑢𐑫𐑛 𐑧𐑯𐑦𐑢𐑪𐑯 𐑢𐑭𐑯𐑑 𐑑 𐑿𐑟 ·𐑖𐑱𐑝𐑾𐑯? ! I would also be interested in participating in some sort of correspondence to practice QS. I remember doing something like that a number of years ago, and I believe it was in the context of this group. I share the sentiment of wanting to actually use QS for communication and not just for personal use. Benjamin Bruce Ipan ne 16 tonal tlen metstli 09 tlen xiwitl 2022, ipan 14:36 kawitl, Peter <pedrocottontail@...> kiihkwilo:
|
|
|
|
Michael <mike.punter@...>
I use Shavian for the same reason as you, Peter. I even have FoxReplace turn web pages into Shavian for practice. Have only a few words set up, about 100+. Also trying to read Pride and Prejudice.
|
|
|
|
Paige
Peter, I use QS exclusively and have since 1975. I feel that the letters Read repurposed when he devised QS leads to difficulty in reading Shavian now. And I did start with Shavian all those many years ago, but I quickly transitioned to QS after I received a copy of Read's QS manual. Best of luck in your QS/Shavian endeavors. Paige Gabhart On 9/16/2022 3:36 PM, Peter wrote:
Hi all, |
|
|
|
kevin bullock
Good day, I use QS exclusively. Kevin On Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 14:36 Peter <pedrocottontail@...> wrote: Hi all, |
|
|
|
Peter
Hi all,
I am curious if others here practice both Shavian and QS, or if most folks are QS exclusive. I've just learned Shavian so that I can enjoy its Unicode support and its (seemingly) more active online community; corresponding with others is these scripts is important to me. Having said that, I would also like to correspond with others in QS, and was wondering if there is an ongoing correspondence among those in this group, or if folks are interested in starting one. Personally I'm happy to share scans of handwritten Senior QS, or share typed correspondence in Junior QS via PDF or images – whichever way would be most accessible and least dependent on specific software configurations for senders/receivers. |
|
|
