Re: re-phonologization

Robert Jung wrote:

> I tried such a thing once; what do you think?
> Here is the sketch:
(snip sketch)

Actually, what you came up with is pretty different from what I'm
talking about.  You've largely kept the same or similar phonological
form of roots, and changed the affixes and syntax and such.  My project
has exactly the same grammar (both morphology and syntax) as English,
but every word and affix has a new phonological form, which is very
different from the original form, but can be systematically derived
from it.  Mine is sort of like a spoken cipher, where instead of
substituting one letter for another, you substitute one phoneme for
another, with the additional complication that, in order to keep it
reasonably pronounceable, sounds are swapped with others of similar
manner of articulation.

=====
I'm revolting agenst standerd Inglish spelling.  Odd spellings ar probly intentional.

______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca