Re: USAGE: Adapting non-Latin scripts

veritosproject wrote:
>Part of the problem is we are inundated with our current spelling.  I
>was pointing out to a non-conlanger that "ch" was not a single
>sound,as many believe, but two, before I got around to showing [tS], I
>got told: "of course!  the c then the h!  two sounds." lol...
Maybe <j> might have worked better?
Anyway, [tS] versus [t] has the problem that the former is postalveolar, and
the latter's plain alveolar... and a plosive's sound is all in the release
anyway. That's the reason why affricates are so commonly considered their
own phonemes, while stuff like /st/ aren't.

John Vertical