Looks OK, but if the goal is to make for an easy transition for current
English writers and readers, I think you need a different approach to the
vowels. How about this:
>Vowels:
>- "Short" vowels: (view in fixed font if possible)
> [æ] [E] [I] [Q] [V] [U] [@]
a e i o u uh '
>- "Long" vowels and diphtongs:
> [ej] [i:] [aj] [au] [A:] [O:] [u:] [ju:] [oi]
ay ee ie ow ah oh oo yoo oy
>- Rhotacised vowels:
> [AR] [ER] [iR] [oR] [uR] [3R]
ar air eer or ur er
I also think ngg should be collapsed into ng (as you have already put Nk as
nk).
>Æni obzerveishenz or koments?
Ie think dhis iz sumwut mor reed'b'l for Eenglish speekerz. It reeliez on
orthohgrafik skeemz ahlredee in yoos in th' Eenglish langwij for
repreezenting com'n sowndz. Uh sliet improovment in reed'bilitee cuhd bee
gaynd bie uhlowing multip'l speling choys'z for sum sowndz: "oi" and "oy"
az ahltern'tivz for [oi], for egzamp'l. Dhen it wuhd stil bee uhnambigyoous
for reederz, dhoh not for rieterz. And wee shuhd prob'blee cheet and yooz
"ing" and "ink" eev'n dhoh "eeng" and "eenk" miet bee mor akyur't.
> Das samwan sii æn obvies sursiz of problemz?
"of"? (tee hee)
Cheers, Tom
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tom Tadfor Little tom@telp.com
Santa Fe, New Mexico (USA)
Telperion Productions www.telp.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~