Talk:Stiefografie

No longer a stub?
I hope the article now is no longer a stub? Mr. Stenographer (talk) 01:23, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Lots of errors
"“Vowel signs are only used when a vowel stands at the end of a word. Vowels in the beginning or in the middle of words are represented symbolically by varying the position of the following consonant signs.”"

Wrong. The “vowel sign” is not written at the beginning nor the end of words. The “vowel sign” is used to write consecutive vowels. Though beginning in “Aufbauschrif I” it is also used as a brief form of the different forms of the verb “werden”. To quote Helmut Stief (Grundschrift):

“folgen zwei selbstlaute aufeinander, wird der erste unter Verwendung des Selbstlautzeichens dargestellt, das wie ein mitlautzeichen behandelt wird.

am wortanfang und am wortende wird das selbstlautzeichen nicht geschrieben.

[...]”

Next: "“The consonant signs are made by simplifying the features of cursive Latin letters.”"

Only technically correct and unclear. Even the hieroglyphs have “features of cursive Latin letters”, though they are not a simplification.

In fact, the characters in Stiefographie bear little to no resemblance to the English alphabet. They are, however, identical to the DEK letters, though in different order.

"“There are only 24 characters for consonants and combinations of consonants (e.g. sch, sp, st).”"

This could be considered hairsplitting, but since Stiefographie is a phonetic script it would be correct to say, that a sign represents one phonem/pair of phonems and in some cases even two (e.g. ng and nk share same character). In the quote above “sch” is pronounced like the english “sh”  and “sp”  is pronounced like “sh-p”. Similar simplifications can be found with vowels: each linkage representing a vowel is actually representing two similar sounding vowels (e.g. “Hut” and “Haut”  would read the same). They can be distinguished by a dot under the sign.

2A02:8109:9440:5490:7D74:5725:563F:1350 (talk) 13:51, 21 January 2017 (UTC)angrybird2407