Re: New cyriliic orthography for WT6b

On 19 Jan 00, at 14:38, Steg Belsky wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 00:26:07 -0500 Paul Bennett
> <paulnkathy@...> writes:
>
> > Dh  dh  D    0417+ 0437+
> > Th  th  T    0421+ 0441+
>
> > Any comments on either the romanisation or the 'cyrillisation'?
>
> When i was trying to come up with a cyrillicization for Rokbeigalmki it
> was suggested that i do the following to represent /D/ and /T/:
>
> /D/ ~ unicode 0402 (big) 0452 (small)
> /T/ ~ unicode 040B (big) 045B (small)
>
>
They look kinda good, but are not very consistent with any existing
cyrillic usage that I'm aware of.  At least there's a precedent for ze and
es being used for edh and thorn, in Turkmen.

OTOH, I suppose I haven't relied *very* strongly on precedent for some of
my other letters <G>, so I'll take them into account, and let them
percolate thru my brain for a few hours, and see what happens.

Thanks for the idea,


Paul