Re: And Now... Arabic Rokbeigalmki Transliteration
|From:||Vasiliy Chernov <bc_@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 22:24|
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:27:14 -0500, Steg Belsky <draqonfayir@...> wrote:
>On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:06:56 -0500 Vasiliy Chernov <bc_@...> writes:[...]
>> With 4 options for superscript diacritics (zero, fatHa, damma and
>> superscript alif) and 2 options for subscript ones (zero and kasra),
>> already have 8 combinations without "matres lectionis"... and if
>> add some less traditional lower diacritic (e. g., "lower damma"),
>> even 12
>> (one of them "zero+zero"). Then "waw", "alif" and "ya" will supply
>> you with the slots for long vowels and diphthongs.
>So you think that i should double-up on the vowel letters? Like have a
>vowel that is represented by fatHa-kasra, or kasra-damma, etc.? I had
>originally thought of that back the first time i considered making an
>Arabic transliteration scheme for Rokbeigalmki, but thought that it would
>probably be unnatural like that...
It seems to me that I've seen something like that for I forget which
language using Arabic script. As for details, I think it must conform vowel
frequencies (most complex notation for least frequent phonemes).
Alternatively, you could proceed from the notation system of some language
that has lost vowel lengths (e. g. Modern Persian) and invent a less
traditional method for marking long vowels and diphthongs occurring in R.
It won't be easy either way, I guess...