Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Orthography question for the group.

From:Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>
Date:Wednesday, July 16, 2003, 21:14
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 01:56:56PM -0700, Stone Gordonssen wrote:
> I'm curious to know indivual's perferences with regards to using the latin > alphabet for certain orthographic mappings. > > E.g. > [ts] could be rendered _ts_ or _z_ so long as any reader is prewarned of > either mapping and orthographic ambiguities could be resolved. The same with > [S] as _x_ or _sh_, etc. > > However, which is more pleasing to the eye, assuming the goal is to be > readily apparent rather than obscured?
For aesthetic pleasure, <c> for /ts/ is another popular choice, with <c^> (Unicode <č>) for /tS/ as in the Americanist tradition. In my most recent bout of Latinization, I decided to extrapolate from those choices thus: ASCII Unicode <c> /ts/ <c^> /tS/ <č> /tʃ/ <j> /dz/ <j^> /dZ/ <ǰ> /dʒ/ <s^> /S/ <š> /ʃ/ <z^> /Z/ <ž> /ʒ/ For obviosity, though, I'd go with digraphs (and one trigraph) wherever there was no ambiguity: <ts> /ts/ <ch> /tS/ /tʃ/ <dz> /dz/ <dzh> /dZ/ /dʒ/ <sh> /S/ /ʃ/ <zh> /Z/ /ʒ/ -Mark

Reply

michael poxon <m.poxon@...>