Re: Seinundjei Script (is actually about allophony now)

>The consonant glyphs show -citation forms.-
1) So they show the underlying form (which may be changed by harmony)?

>The vowel matras show what harmony quality is going on in the consonant
>they are attached to.
2) I.e. the vowel markers always agree with the phonetic realization?

>but in a running text you will see things like the following:
>
>tithin /tiTin/
>bech t'ith'in /beS tSiTiJ/
>nénj t,ith,in /ne:n` t`iTin`/ (this is starting to make for a nice way of
>narrowly transcribing sein' script)
>
>where the |tXthXn| (for whatever reason |tithina| didn't sound like good
>Sein' to me:) sequence represents the same word, varying allophonically.
3) /T D/ _don't_ harmonize? That clears it up a little. Listing those
together with the "main" fricatives and /s z/ separately suggested to me
that those might be alveolar, not dental spirants.
4) There's no plosive/affricate distinction with the palatals, it seems?
5) Harmony spreads over the whole utterance??

If I'm right so far, then yes, I think I got it.


>Did that make sense, or am I staying up too late?
>Shreyas Sampat
I'd guess both. It does make sense, but it was a little hard to interpret
initially. :)

John Vertical
PS. I might be just me, but with regards to the romanization, I find the
practice of using <j> for both a palatal plosive and a palatalization marker
a little ugly. And do your really have /h G/ without an /x/, or is /x/ <h>
and not <kh> for some reason?

Reply