Re: Possible Nanoling inventory.
|From:||Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, February 3, 2004, 21:54|
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 22:08:45 +0100,
Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> wrote:
> Quoting Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>:
> [snip Nanoling inventory and transcription]
> > The system looks weird to someone not used to it, and the tetragraphs
> > are cool! But it has its own inner logic. I like it!
> > (But how are [kw] and [q] distinguished in writing? They both
> > transcribe as _co_.)
> The syllable structure isn't set in stone yet, but I'm leaning towards CVN,
> where N=nasal, so that particular ambiguity won't arise.
> You'd, however, get
> much the same for medial [Nw] and [N\] - both are _ño_. I'm figuring I'll
> simply leave it in - ambuigity isn't exactly unknown in natlangs'
> orthographies, and no reason Nanoling's should be less ambiguous than
> Meghean's, is there?
There isn't. Not every ambiguity must be resolved. In fact,
I find the amount of ambiguity in your orthography just right,
especially given the fact that the Dwarves have borrowed a writing
system from a language with a very different phonology.