John Cowan <cowan@...> wrote:
>=20
> Danny Wier scripsit:
>=20
> > By the way, I wonder why Spanish doesn't write <nn> for palatal <n>, =
instead=20
> > of <=F1>, so that an extra character isn't necessary? I mean, it wou=
ld=20
> > conform to the most usual convention for indicating palatization, lik=
e <ll>=20
> > does (and <rr> indicates a sound shift, from tap to trill). Also, <=F1=
>=20
> > usually comes from Latin <nn> anyway, such as _a=F1o_ 'year' from _an=
nus_. =20
> > (I've seen <ny> as an ASCII alternative, but I still think <nn> looks=
=20
> > better, compare <anyo> to <anno>, <cany=F3> to <cann=F3n> for <ca=F1=F3=
n> 'cannon')
>=20
> Historically the tilde *is* an "n".
Really? So that's the way nasals were marked all over with=20
a tilde in old times! I mean, you see old Spanish texts and
they write _cantaban_ as=20
C A T-with-a-tilde A B (or V) A-with-a-tilde.
The same if the nasal was an M.
To Danny: <nn> has a problem: it's already used in some words. Mainly
those with prefixes like <en-> and <in->, and in verb forms with the
1pACC clitic <-nos>. And it *is* pronounced double, at least in careful
speech. <ny> is not very frequent (don't know why), but it exists.
Plus the Spaniards defend their <=F1>'s at all cost in every project of
orthographic reform -- it's in their very name, you see. :)
--Pablo Flores
http://draseleq.conlang.org/pablo-david/