Path: utzoo!attcan!cmtl01!matrox!uvm-gen!uunet!lll-winken!ames!pasteur!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!izumi
From: izumi@violet.berkeley.edu (Izumi Ohzawa)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Wouldn't it be neat?
Message-ID: <19486@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 26 Jan 89 02:47:54 GMT
References: <174@usl-pc.usl.edu> <680007@hpcuhc.HP.COM>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 23

In article <680007@hpcuhc.HP.COM> kenny@hpcuhc.HP.COM (Kenneth Lee) writes:
>Dear NeXT readers/users,
>   
>   Isn't it a shame that the Webster's dictionary is a "read" only file!
>2) I would scan in pictures of people I know and "link" them with
>specific definitions. So the next time I say something like : "She is 
>so stubborn!, If you look up 'stubborn' in the dictionary, it 
>will have her picture there!", I will mean it!
>Enough of my incoherent ramblings!

As one who had to learn English as a foreign language, it would be
really neat if NeXT's Webster's dictionary could SPEAK OUT words
via its 16bit DACs.  No, it doesn't have to be in stereo :-).
But, it should be by someone's real voice, not by silly sounding
text-to-speech synthesis.

Perhaps, someone can make a lot of money compiling the voice data
base.

As to the speaker, I will let that be fought out by  New Englanders,
Texans,  Mid-westerners, and Californians.

Izumi Ohzawa