[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
> Yes. My reasoning is that if you have a single symbol for 'ts,' then you > also must have one for 'tS,' 'dz', 'dZ,' 'ks,' 'gz,' etc. > > Now, I can see Txeqli _expanding- in the future, to include other letters > for other sounds. At this point in technology, tho, it has to be limited to > the 26. I could also see it adopting the Shavian system entirely. Where's the new phoneme chart posted? If it happens that /tS/ retains its status as a single phoneme, I don't see why "tx" is preferrable to "c". Besides, to me the digraph "tx" instantly reminds me of Basque. About Shavian, I've always liked it, but I think the use of any other alphabet that's not the roman will only cause that most people all over the world will have problems writing the language and will thus feel very disencouraged to use it. Not to mention the fact that the roman alphabet has thousands and thousands of already available fonts, while nothing similar can be said of the Greek, Cyrillic, Chinese, etc. writing systems and less of Shavian, which to my knowledge offers just one font. About the use of "c" in a way such as "ctcin", I don't like tha idea at all. I think that for modifying the value of a letter (if there's really a need for that) it's much better to use non-letters, such as diacritics, apostrophes and the like (t'in, t*in). But the main question here is: Which value should t assume when appearing between c's? Why [T] and not e.g. a glottalized or a retroflex t? What would "cbc", "chc", "cac"... stand for? Best regards, Javier