[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On 2012-02-23 21:47, Peter Collier wrote:
My gut feeling (by which I mean it popped into my head right away, felt right, and didn't undergo any further thought on my part), was that it ought to be<tc> or<tç>. I agree<tg> looks, well, bleurgh.<tçel> and<tçimair> would look much prettier.
I have considered them, and my favorite naughty digraph _çh_, which conhistorically has been proposed as a diaphonic spelling for for C before A, where southern Rhodrese dialects have /k/ and northern Borgognay dialects have /(\t)\S/, and correspondingly _g'h_ for the voiced counterpart. The problem with any spelling based on _ç_ is that _ç_ on its own doesn't stand for any palatatal sound, but for /s/ < /ts/ < /tj/ &c. _g_ at least is used for /dZ/. Moreover _çh_ wouldn't be "hardened _ç_" but "softened _ch_" since most words with CA would be spelled _chia_ with _ch_ for /k/ according to the southern pronunciation. Rhodrese doesn't have _h_ as a mark of palatalization but to mark a hard pronunciation like Italian. Since the plural of e.g. /kamp/ is /kemp/ I think _ch, gh_ is the best choice to spell /k g/ before _e i y_. Plural _**quemp_ beside singular _camp_ would look really odd; _camp \~ chemp_ looks much better (which would be _çhamp \~ çhemp_ with the diaphonic spelling, BTW.)
I shall now retire to think of some valid points to support my instincts.
No need and no worries. David and Adam have swayed
the part of me which wants to keep _tx_.
La _tx_ no se caungerat peuntx!
(BTW the WP page on Catalan orthography claims that
there is only one minimal pair cel·la ('cell') vs cella
('eyebrow'). Why the Catalans had to be bloody
different from Occitan with _lh, nh_ is actually beyond
me too. Alas I'll have to hurt David's aesthetic senses
by pointing out that Rhodrese at least potentially uses
all of _d·g, g·l, g·n, l·l, s·g_ and perhaps even _s·c_
in names adopted from French. I actually got words
where they are 'needed' for most of them. The middot
may not be the the prettiest invention in typography,
but it's a handy device where your medium, audience or
conculture setting are not amenable to (a lot of)
diacritical marks. I have an alternative orthography
for Rhodrese using all of _c, g, n, l, s, t_ with
cedilla, but I don't actually use it; an established
traditional orthography in western Europe reformed so
drastically would be unrealistic!)
/bpj