Editor for this issue: <>
A few people have already heard from me privately, but I wished to send thanks to EVERYONE who responded to my inquiries regarding linguistic reversal, and individual replies were seriously encroaching on my workload (so said my boss, but you know how they are...]). Either I hit a topic nearly as interesting as the rude negators, or there are LOTS of people out there. For those interested, evidently it is possible to approximate very closely the sounds of reversed speech (several people wrote with examples of class exercises involving trying to phonetically reverse a word or phrase "in-the-head" and reversing the tape of these to see how closely they came to the original), although it sounds like it takes a lot of practice. No-one was clear on whether reversing tapes of vocal tracks can change the number of syllables (sounds like I've got a few people trying, however), but reversing the spelling of a word can. Example given was a language with syllabic nasals and prenasalised stops. <badn> would have two syllables, but <ndab> would have one. How closely the pronunciation of a reversed phonetic spelling will approximate the actual reversed sound of a word is (obviously) a function of how much phonetic detail the alphabet can capture. As to whether Satan is using this method to consume the minds of our youth, I think he'd be better off putting messages in forwards (incidentally, it was mentioned that "Jesus loves me" played backwards sounds a bit like "We smell sausage"; evidently Satan works at Pizza Hut..:-). If there is some subconscious recognition of backwards mes- sages, no-one has demonstrated it yet. All this gookledegob has been interesting to me as I am trying to conjure up a language based upon a reversible alphabet. It's fairly phonetic, but the reversibility throws a twist into it from the stand- point that words are never upside-down, they just read differently (and presumably have contrasting meanings). The question is an interesting one: how would a language develop and/or utilize such a property? I'm currently trying to figure a way to define the individual phonetic particles (a la d'Olivet's Hebraic Language Restored) to give me something to work from in defining words, but the construction of same is proving no mean feat. Prefix/suffix takes on a new meaning when each has to serve the purpose of the other (and do it upside-down)] Sentence structure shall not even be considered in this lifetime. Anyhow, I'm raving now, and this was meant to take up as little space as possible (alas...). Thanks to all for your responses (and patience), and as always, any information or advice is welcome. I'm off to the speech lab. Cheers, Scott Edgar <scott-edgarMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueuiowa.edu> *Another Actual Fact: The meaning of the word "mutant" has changed gradually over the years.*