digraphs in Lenmoct

['Sr\ejas 'sampat r\oUt]:
> > Hi all.
> >
> > This is my first mention of my newest language (sketch),
> > Lenmoct. The name is pronounced ['lEm:VC] and means
> > mother-goddess. My goal was to create a reverse-sexist
> > conlang with an interesting- looking orthography.
> <clip interesting stuff>
>
> I'm a big orthography nut.
> Tell us more about your orthography, Jake.  What's the methodology
> behind it?  Is't more or less random, or do you have a methodology
> behind all your exotic multigraphy?
Well, it's not completely random.  Here is a list of all the digraphs
and their pronunciations and reasonings.  Then I'll try to sum up.

cg: [x]
my favorite.  I saw the x sound as something aproximating |c| and |g|
but that could not be spelled easily with the latin orthography, barring
the use of h.  I banned h from my orthography, because it was too simple
for making digraphs.

td: [T]
Based on the same reasoning as cg.

ct: [C]
T adds breath.  What can I say?  There is no conventional reason for this,
nor does it make sense with t as a stop, but I used it.  There were no other
sounds like [S] in my phonology (which would be |st| under this reasoning),
or I would have spread this rule farther.

ci: [j], cu: [w]
I thought that c looked good initially and it was a consonant, so could give
its
"consonantness" to the vowel following it.

dd: [r]
The rolled r sounds like many d's in rapid succesion.

nm: [m]
I reasoned that [Nm] was an invalid cluster and didn't sound well.  (|n| is
/N/
in most places)  All other cases of singular m were lost through sound
changes
(except in pronouns) and what was left were these, with the unpronounced
|e| between n and m removed.

I think that's it.  If not, too bad.  So, for the most part, I was thinking
about
the way it would look as a whole and reasoning people would use without
a good background in phonology.

What do you think?

Jake

(I sent this out earlier as a personal message by mistake, so it it is to
the group).