Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: CHAT: weird names

From:R G Roberts <rgroberts@...>
Date:Friday, August 6, 1999, 4:03
Re your correspondence about c / k / q?? you may or may not be =
interested to know that the earliest printers setting up the type for =
the Welsh Bible (and of course the Bible was always the first book to be =
printed everywhere in the world) found that they didn't have enough 'k' =
types (because 'k' was then relatively rare) so they used 'c' throughout =
even though 'k' should have been the correct letter! Hence today 'c' is =
always hard and 'k' does not exist in the alphabet!

By the way, how does 'q' fit into all this?

Richy Roberts

----- Original Message -----=20
From: Carlos Thompson <carlos_thompson@...>
To: Multiple recipients of list CONLANG <CONLANG@...>
Sent: 06 August 1999 03:48
Subject: Re: chat: weird names


> Nik wrote: >=20 > > Irina Rempt-Drijfhout wrote: > > > > I like it. How's the "C" pronounced? > > > > > > Always /k/ though it may be slightly palatalized before /e/ or /i/ > > > (not here, obviously). > > > > Interesting. I wonder how many other people use {c} for /k/? > > Personally, I dislike that letter for /k/, but that's just a =
personal
> > prejudice of mine. Mostly because if I use {c} in a Conlang, I like =
to
> > reserve it for /tS/ or /c/. >=20 > I some times live <c> for /k/... I feel it fits better in my =
aestetics.
> That's why Chleweyish uses <c> for /k/... well it uses also <c> for =
/tS/
> before front vowels and <ch> for /x/ and <cy> for /tS/. >=20 > Old Rithian wasn't written in Roman but in Thompinian alphabet. =
Thompinian
> sometimes replaces Roman symbols for their own in orthoraphic basis, > sometimes in phonetical basis... well it has two simbols usually =
romanized
> as <c> and <k>. Well, <c> will sound /k/ except before front =
vowels... and
> each language would define how <c> was pronounced before front vowels: =
/s/
> or /T/ for spanish, /tS/ for italian... usually /s/ for Rithian. But > Rithian allso used <k>, after a while <k> became /k_h/ and <c> an > unaspirated /k/. Now I'm trying to use Thompinian in Chleweyish and I =
will
> decide use Thompinian <c> for Roman <c>: /k/. >=20 > By other way... Kizidanoce and Hangkerimce romanisation use <k> for =
/k/ and
> <c> for /C/... in aold romanisations they use <c>, <qu>, <g> and <k> =
for /k/
> and <ch> for /C/... when Kizidanoce redefined its orthography decided =
for
> use only <k> for /k/ and <ch> for /C/... When an official romanising =
where
> defined for Hangkerimce, they used the Kizidanoce convention dropping =
the
> {h} in <ch> (after there was no other {c} and they followed the basis =
of one
> sound one letter... well, what a Hangkerimce speaker listens as one =
sound).
> Finally, many Kizidanoce writers begun to drop the {h} and modern day > Kizidanoce is writen with <c> for /C/. >=20 > In my sketching phonology for Moscha language I'm playing with <c> for =
/c/,
> and <ch> for /c_h/ wich will make a series of aspirated and =
unaspirated
> voiceless stops: /p/, /p_h/, /t/, /t_h/, /c/, /c_h/, /k/, /k_h/, /q/, =
/q_h/
> and no voiced oral stop. I'm just needing the propper history for =
using the
> convention <p>, <ph>, <t>, <th>, <c>, <ch>, <k>, <kh>, <q>, <qh> in =
Moscha
> official romanisation. >=20 > Criollo will follow Spanish conventions while Nyucar will combine =
English
> and Spanish conventions besides Influences from Hangkerimce =
romanisation...
> after all, Nyucar had and orthographic reform after being somhow =
isolated
> from other English speaking countries. Probably it will end out as =
Nyukar
> but Criollo will never be Krioyo. > (Nyucar is short from Nyu Cartayinian <- New Cartagenian). >=20 > Resumen: Chleweyish uses <c> for /k/ because I liked that way (and > Chleweyish is a personal language). Kizidanoce, the romanisations of > Hangkerimce and Moscha, Criollo and Nyucar use <c> for /C/, /C/, /c/, =
/k/
> and /k/ for historical reasons. I would supose that if my conculture =
where
> in eastern Europe I would use <c> for /ts/. >=20 > But if I where romanising a language and there is not historical =
background
> on why using one or another convention I would surele use <k> for /k/ =
and
> reserve <c> for any sound in the /ts/, /tS/, /C/, /tS/, /c/ range. >=20 > About /j/... in my earlier sketches I was using <j> for Hangkerimce =
/j/...
> but I changed for <y>... because there was Spaniards and Englishmen =
the
> people Hangkerimians had contact with Roman alphabet and I don't =
believe
> that they would use <j> /S/ or <j> /dZ/ for /j/. >=20 > In Chleweyish /j/ is <i>, while both <j> and <y> are used for /j\/ =
which
> means: /j/ is an allophony of /i/. >=20 > If no background is given... I prefere /j/ being <j>. >=20 > -- Carlos Th >=20