04-04-2022, 08:42 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2022, 11:54 AM by Ahmet Ardıç.)
There will be one more thing to consider when it comes time to apply linguistic statistics to ATA transcription.
Perhaps the very important point is, that the entropy does not depend on which alphabet is used, but only on the probabilities or frequencies. In this case this means, that the entropy of a text does not change if it is subject to a simple substitution encoding.
You can read the with EVA as DAIIN with the same phonetic value. But in ATA transcription, if we read this same word as like SAM, ŞEM, ŞAM in this case, their connected part of the text entropy will change because of its probabilities and frequencies change too. There are similar sound changes for other words too. I have explained this issue with reasons in detail in my previous statements.
If it is possible for the same spelled words to be read differently, this will happen for almost any word. For this reason, first of all, linguists should revise the writing style of 600 years ago in every line and make the text clear as sound value. I can partially do this myself. However, when multiple meanings of different pronunciations overlap with sentence integrity, it will be possible for me to determine more clearly which sound value should be taken in which sense, with the support of linguists.
The case of a word being read in more than one form is not a structure or formation that I have invented to create a wide reading area for myself in my transcription today. We know from ancient inscriptions and manuscripts that this was also seen in other Turkish language writing alphabets historically. There was also the case that some letters, such as A and E, were expressed with a single sign historically too.
However, if there are those who think that we have created a reading space for ourselves by using these sound equivalents, I should tell them that all the different pronunciations of the same word such as SEM, ŞEM, ŞAM have 1/1 equivalents in Turkish dictionaries.
You can't see 1/1-same situation of this in the same way in Indo-European languages. This situation made it easier for the author to make word games in sentences.
Perhaps the very important point is, that the entropy does not depend on which alphabet is used, but only on the probabilities or frequencies. In this case this means, that the entropy of a text does not change if it is subject to a simple substitution encoding.
You can read the with EVA as DAIIN with the same phonetic value. But in ATA transcription, if we read this same word as like SAM, ŞEM, ŞAM in this case, their connected part of the text entropy will change because of its probabilities and frequencies change too. There are similar sound changes for other words too. I have explained this issue with reasons in detail in my previous statements.
If it is possible for the same spelled words to be read differently, this will happen for almost any word. For this reason, first of all, linguists should revise the writing style of 600 years ago in every line and make the text clear as sound value. I can partially do this myself. However, when multiple meanings of different pronunciations overlap with sentence integrity, it will be possible for me to determine more clearly which sound value should be taken in which sense, with the support of linguists.
The case of a word being read in more than one form is not a structure or formation that I have invented to create a wide reading area for myself in my transcription today. We know from ancient inscriptions and manuscripts that this was also seen in other Turkish language writing alphabets historically. There was also the case that some letters, such as A and E, were expressed with a single sign historically too.
However, if there are those who think that we have created a reading space for ourselves by using these sound equivalents, I should tell them that all the different pronunciations of the same word such as SEM, ŞEM, ŞAM have 1/1 equivalents in Turkish dictionaries.
You can't see 1/1-same situation of this in the same way in Indo-European languages. This situation made it easier for the author to make word games in sentences.