Hi,
> A sideline about Celtic written Cyrillic: When I first joined this list in
1997,
> someone from Bulgaria said that he used Cyrillic to transliterate Irish
Gaelic
> for personal study. He found that the slender/broad system of consonant
> palatization and velarization fit in well with Cyrillic's use of hard and
soft
> sign and hard and soft vowels to indicate palatization "soft" and
> non-palatization "hard".
Did I not promise some severla months ago I'd come up with a Cyrillic Irish
orthography? Well, I did, only I didn't show it to anyone :-)
> Now Welsh doesn't have broad or slender consonants, and
> Russian does. Still, the existence of the high central vowel in Russian
(bI)
> allows for at least that part of Welsh (specifically the Northern dialect)
to be
> carried over.
Yes, but the problem is with 'y' then Perhaps we should adapt the "hard
sign"? That'd look weird - it does with lojban. Besides, reading a hard sign
as the "bl" might seem, well, awkward.
> The funny sounds like "th", "dd', "ll" and "rh" have no Cyrillic
> counterparts, however, unless you assign archaic Russian _fita_ (analogous
to
> Greek theta) to "th" and use doubled consonants for the rest.
That also looks weird. We've tried that in a Tolkien discussion -
transliterating Sindarin 'dh's as "dd". That'd come out awful :-)
--Pavel