Re: Questions about and suggestions for (C)XS

Quoting Tristan Mc Leay <kesuari@...>:

> > Do any languages have phonemic /h\/? If not, I think we should just use
> > [h_v], and use [h\] for something else.
>
> What? I can't see any other use for it. Try using it. (Incidentally,
> people who (ab)use voice for tenseness would lose the possibility for
> distinguishing between a lax voiced, tense voiced, lax unvoiced and
> tense unvoiced glottal fricatives. Probably only useful in close
> phonetic representations of some conlang, but it's still worth
> considering...)
The fact that IPA has a separate symbol for [h\] would suggest it _is_ phonemic
in some natlang; anyone know which that may be?

One of my conlangs have a phoneme realized as [h\] or [?\], but there being no
[h], there's no contrast, and I'd be tempted to write it phonematically as /h/,
just to get rid of ugly backslashes. The "official" romanization of the glyph
therefore is h-underline, but in ASCII I use a simple 'h'.

In the descendant langs, it mostly gets lost, or becomes [h] in initial
position.

                                                        Andreas