Jonathan Sterling

I was perusing my new German grammar book from 1930 that I got for Christmas, and I was interested to see some rules for German pronunciation whereof I had been theretofore unaware, and others whereon I had not been totally clear. Note that these are not definitive, and cannot represent the pronunciation of all German speakers.

1. At the beginning of a syllable g is pronounced /g/ (voiced velar plosive)
2. Between the vowels (i, e, ie, ä, &c.), g is pronounced /ʝ/ (voiced palatal fricative)
3. Between the vowels (u, o, a, &c.), g is pronounced /ɣ/ (voiced velar fricative).
4. At the end of a syllable after the vowels(i, e, ie, ä, &c.), g is pronounced /ç/ (voiceless palatal fricative).
5. At the end of a syllable after the vowels (u, o, a, &c.), g is pronounced /x/ (voiceless velar fricative).
6. At the end of a syllable after the vowels(i, e, ie, ä, &c.), ch is pronounced /ç/ (voiceless palatal fricative).
7. At the end of a syllable after the vowels(u, o, a, &c.), ch is pronounced /x/ (voiceless velar fricative).
8. At the end of a syllable, b, d & g are pronounced voiceless (b->p, d->t); see above for information on g.
9. Before and between vowels, r is pronunced /ʁ/ (voiced uvular fricative); it is important to note that some southern speakers pronounce it /r/ (voiced alveolar trill), and that this is regarded as acceptable; it should also be noted that many pronunciation guides prescribe /ʀ/ (voiced uvular trill), but this is highly erroneous. Only a few languages make this sound (some of the Semitic ones do, I believe); in German, there is no actual trilling going on in the back of the throat.
10. After a vowel, r is often reduced to /ɐ̯/ (non-syllabic near open central).
11. The diphthong ei is best represented as /aɪ̯/ (a diphthong of an unrounded open front vowel and an unrounded near close front vowel).
12. The diphthong eu is best represented as /ɔʏ̯/ (a diphthong of a rounded open-mid back vowel and a rounded near close front vowel).

As an example, the following is the first paragraph of my translation of The Polar Express:

Am Heiligabend vor vielen Jahren lag ich im Bette. Ich raschelte nicht die Bettücher. Ich atmete langsam und ruhig. Ich hörte nach einem Geräusche—einem Geräusche, das mir ein Freund sagte, daß ich nie hören würde—des Santas läutende Schlittenglocken.

Now, here is my phonetic transcription*:

ʔam ˌhaɪ̯lɪçˈʔaːbn̩t foːɐ̯ ˈfi:lən ˈjaːʁən lax ʔɪç ʔɪm ˈbɛtə

ʔɪç ˈʁaʃl̩tə niçt diː ˈbetˌtyːçɐ. ʔɪç ˈʔaːtˌmɛtə ˈlaŋzaːm ʔʊnt ˈʁuːɪç

ʔɪç ˈhøːɐ̯tə naːx ˈʔaɪ̯nəm gəˈʁɔʏ̯ʃə ˈaɪ̯nəm gəˈʁɔʏ̯ʃə das miːɐ̯ ʔaɪ̯n fʁɔʏ̯nt ˈzaxte das ʔɪç niː ˈhøːʁən ˈvʏʁdə dɛs zantəz lɔʏ̯tn̩də ˈʃlɪtn̩ˌglɔkən

———–
* To see how these different characters sound, visit The International Phonetic Alphabet Sound Illustrations page.

The Hit List from Potion Factory is a beautiful new application that immediately competes with Things from Cultured Code and OmniFocus from The Omni Group.

The Hit List has one of the most beautiful icons I have ever seen and fits in perfectly with your Mac desktop.

It is somewhat along the lines of Things and OmniFocus in that it roughly follows the GTD philosophy, where tasks are divided into different groups based on their timeframe, project, and context. Like OmniFocus, tasks are shown in an outline view, but it looks more like ruled paper.

Here is a full screenshot:

A screenshot of the beautiful application, The Hit List from Potion Factory.

One really interesting feature is the built-in time-tracker, which allows you to show both elapsed time on a task and ETA (as set by the user for the specific task).

A neat little panel that lets you see the elapsed time and ETA on a task.

Overall, the software appears to be much more flexible than Things  (I haven’t had a lot of experience with OmniFocus; it was too complicated for me). It certainly, at least to me, is far more visually appealing.

There are a few problems, though, but this is a private beta. I received errors when I attempted to add a sub-task to another. Also, the functionality to synchronise with iCal seemed to be disabled. I have not tested it extensively for bugs, because, as I point out in the next paragraph, I won’t be able to use the software in the long run.

Unfortunately, all this comes with a rather large price-tag: $69.00. While I am all for independent software developers making what they deserve (and they certainly deserve all they can get), I am unable to afford software like this. So, while it is incredibly beautiful, I will not be able to use it beyond the beta period, which saddens me.

To conclude, applications like The Hit List are what get me really excited about living in the Mac platform. Here, beauty and utility go hand in hand, though it come at great monetary cost. When I used Linux, often an application would include a poor-to-mediocre user interface (of course, never integrating with the rest of my software because of the multitude of interface kits) and limited-to-high utility; occasionally, the user interface would be nice, but the utility would be almost nonexistent, and the software would be really, really buggy. When I used Windows XP, usually the utility was limited-to-medium and user experience very, very low (except for pro apps like Adobe CS3).

Every time I start to get a little worried about the decadence of the Mac community, something great like this pops up and reminds me why I spent all my money in order to join it.