+--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+ | Mar 5, '11 2:57 PM
\ | | style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times | by Krzysztof for | | ">\ | | | | | | ---------------------------------- | | | ------------------------------------ | | | ------------------------------------ | | | ------------------------------------ | | | ------------------------------------ | | | ------------------------------------ | | | ------------------------------------ | | | -------------------- | | | Ponieważ okazuje się, że ar | | | tykuł, o którym mowa, czytelny jest t | | | ylko dla członków grupy, poniżej wkl | | | ejam jego treść tak, jak to wrzuciłe | | | m na grupę: | | | ---------------------------------- | | | ------------------------------------ | | | ------------------------------------ | | | ------------------------------------ | | | ------------------------------------ | | | ------------------------------------ | | | ------------------------------------ | | | -------------------- | | | | | | | | | | | || | | Polish Gregg - | | | summary | | +--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
I think it's time to sum up my impressions of the **Polish version of
Gregg Shorthand**, as I promised to Chuck couple months ago. I had spent
several months carefully learning the rules of the system, preparing for
them my right hand (I'm left-handed). However, if the graphic material
of the system seems pretty good, the more I could criticize the rules.
The tendency to omit the non-essential sounds as the standard solution -
after many months of research I now know that's a normal solution in
the English systems, but Polish is much more complicated. On one hand, I
received a complete set of words steno-graphically abbreviated, on the
other hand, many of them would never be used in writing, as in the
manual were used only as examples, not commonly used words. Shortening
of words is not based on a strict scheme of rules that you can use on
another word, but rather on the graphic material of the Gregg's
alphabet. The system in Polish is just a simple translation with so few
adaptations, as possible. Thus, some confusion in the method, which,
although effective as writing, seems inadequate to the language.
I would like to put here a small digression: on the basis of my research
and reading I believe that the English (and not only English, I suppose)
stenography is not directly based on the English language, but also a
strong sentimental attachment associated with nineteenth (and before)
century inventors of the shorthand systems to the Bible and the
consequent interest in Jewish culture (how many of early English
shorthand systems were pastors or theologists?). Rules of English
shorthand systems are very similar to the Hebrew writings, especially
when it comes to skipping vowels. But there is another feature:
indicated above patterns of words - the Hebrew alphabet (similar to the
Phoenician and early Greek) can not write in full all of the Hebrew
words, hence the need for schemes of reading. Jewish rabbis have used
this method for thousands of years, and to European science it came
through the study of the Bible.
This can be considered a one of the methods of writing, not just writing
shorthand. It is used also in many derivative alphabets, like Mongolian,
Uighur, Manchu etc. Another method was used by a Roman scribes:
shortening by special characters, signs (sigilla). They had created
enormous number of characters and thus developed cursive writing.
Gabelsberger mainly based on their experiences created the first
(working) cursive shorthand system.
But back to Gregg. The system uses phonetic approach. In the case of the
English language it is the wisest of the possible solutions.
Quantitative advantage, which comes from the departure from the archaic
spelling may be up to 40%. In Polish there is not so well. Departure
from the traditional spelling (as it comes out from our own
calculations) can not give more than 6% of benefit. So the basic of
Gregg system (in addition to writing material) gives us nearly nothing!
Perhaps 400 years of research on the Polish language, would bring good
way of shortening words, what is available for English, but still nobody
is interested in that matter.
In the nineteenth century, one of the Polish stenographic inventors made
a calculation of the statistical distribution of words by the number of
syllables. He performed the same calculation also for the German
language (as his region was then under German occupation), which in this
detail (you need to know) is much more similar to Polish than English.
The statement goes that in the Polish language is much less monosyllable
words, as well as those consisting of two syllables. Words consisting of
three syllables is a little more in the German language. But there is
much more Polish words consisting of four syllables, than the German
words. This advantage disappears again within six-seven syllables.
The conclusion is that, there is in the Polish language a lot of words
consisting of four syllables and more. In English, (you do not even need
special statistical calculations), it is apparent that the most
frequently used words are composed mostly of 1 or 2 syllables, sometimes
of 3 syllables. Words consisting of four or more syllables are rare and
usually relate to complex and specialized subjects. This takes us into a
completely different challenges in the design of characters for a
shorthand system.
Gregg's system with its lovely curves and ellipses is ideally suited to
the English language. In the manual for the Polish version the author
presented examples mainly from the words no longer than 3 syllables
(well, I had found a few 4-syllables examples, usually shorthanded by
sign) - and the longest words were not so easy and swift to write. The
main characters in the system, from the perspective of a graphic, A and
E. These two vowels in the English language and Polish language are
often (they sound differently though), but play different roles. Thus,
in English can afford to write E and EE the same sign, but in Polish it
is impossible, because our vowel I (English EE) does not come from the
E. Its main role is to soften the previous sounds.
This leads us to an important difference between the approach of Gregg
and Polish approach to Polish phonetics. In the Gregg's system, there
are number of special characters for diphones, triphones and other
phenomena among the vowels. In Polish, however, the groups of consonants
are the most difficult, triphones and diphones occur less frequently and
are less valid.
In the same sense, any appearance of vowel I (E, EE) are regarded as the
English diphthongs in the Polish version of Gregg. Thus, the author of
the book made a long list of Polish diphones:
AU, EU, OA, OE, AO, EO,
OI, JI, IE, AI, IU, OI, IO
triphones
EJE, YJE, IJA, JAJ, OJA, UJA, EJA,
and even quatrophones
JUJO, IUJE
and so on.
Many of them are very rare, negligibly rare. Others came from
misunderstanding softening of consonants by "I" (EE) vowel, as it should
be understood phonetically. The usage of the letter "I" to softening
treatment is applied under the Latin alphabet for Polish orthography, in
which (the Latin) was not originally hard and soft consonants. I do not
want to say that Jozef Widzowski (the translator of the system) did not
understand that. He just applied English phonetics to the Polish
language. In modern times, when English became the lingua franca of the
world, we must remember that this does not apply to the English
phonetics, especially phonetics of consonants, which compared with the
phonetics of Slavic languages is quite primitive (which is, in fact, the
advantage, not disadvantage) same as the phonetics of Latin, Spanish, or
French. Let's add to that the complex syntax, word formation, and
impossible to comprehend, even for Polish linguists etymology and we'll
get probably the most difficult language in the world - voila, the
Polish... You can easily check it on this page:
http://grzegorj.private.pl/gram/gram00.html
Here should be emphasized** the importance of a consonants in the Polish
language**. Consonants come together in groups called by stenographers
consonant groups (for example):
S->SZ(SH)->Ś(SH'), C->CZ (CH)->Ć(CH')
SZCZ(SHCH) -> DESZCZ(RAIN), SZCZAW(SORREL), GĄSZCZ(BUSH)
ŚĆ(SH'CH') -> DOŚĆ(ENOUGH), KRAŚĆ(TO STEAL), NIEŚĆ(TO CARRY)
ST -> STAĆ(TO STAND) ETC. but also STRZ(STSH) --> STRZAŁ(SHOT)
GR -> GROZA(THREAT) --> GRZ(GZH)=GRZAĆ(TO HEAT) --->
GRZM(GZHM)=GRZMOT(THUNDER)
SPRZ(SPSH)=SPRZEDAĆ(TO SELL)
WPR(VPR)=WPRAWA(SKILL)
and even
BŹDZIĆ(BZHDZHEETSH=FART :-))
and so on, so on, so on... I found more than 40 consonant groups that
are often used. So, they actually should be considered as independent
consonants, then Polish would look more similar to English.
Let's compare:
"Unexpectedly, the march of innumerable enemy troops begun. From the
philosophical point of view it would be impossible for the non-existence
of an un-parallel universe."
24 words, 165 letters, 49 syllables
Number of syllables for individual words:
5, 1, 1, 1, 4, 3, 1, 2. 1, 1, 5, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3, 1, 1, 4, 1, 1, 4,
3.
Words certainly shorthanded (in any shorthand system):
the, of, from, it, be, for, a = 7, number of appearances = 11
AND THE SAME IN POLISH
"Nieoczekiwanie rozpoczął się przemarsz nieprzeliczonych oddziałów
przeciwnika. Z filozoficznego punktu widzenia niemożliwością byłoby
niezaistnienie wszechświata nierównoległego."
16 words, 177 letters, 57 syllables
Number of syllables for individual words:
6, 3, 1, 2, 5, 3, 3. 6, 2, 3, 5, 3, 4, 3, 6.
Words certainly shorthanded (in any shorthand system):
się, z, byłoby = 3, number of appearances = 3
I think this should explain the superiority of English from the
perspective of shorthand. But for the same reason, other methods should
be used to build a system of shorthand for the Polish language than for
the English language. It is not very good information for me, as the
Gregg's system looks so pretty...
From this place I want to thank Chuck for allowing me to examine the
Polish version of Gregg's Light Line Shorthand for the Million. I would
also like to thank the creators of the translate.google.com to help my
brain not to boil during the writing of this lengthy essay. ;-)
