On Sat, 2002-06-01 at 17:05, J Y S Czhang wrote:
> In a message dated 05/31/2002 09.39.14 PM, stevedegrace@YAHOO.CA quotes
> Christophe (I think) and writes:
>
> >> Well, I like the idea of the pile of new letters.
> >English is boring in its
> >> insistance in not using any diacritic :)) .
> >
> >Yeah, what's up with that, anyway? I like the Old
> >English orthography better than the one we're using
> >now. I think we should start a massive protest
> >movement to bring back thorn :P.
>
> And yogh! to represent /Z/ like in IPA!!!!
Pedantic point. The IPA doesn't have a yogh. It has an ezh. Yoghs look
like threes. (This was a point of argument with the Unicode people a
while back I think, deciding whether they should encode Yogh separately
to the already-encoded ezh. They did. Yogh is towards the end of the
Latin Extended-B range. I think Michael Everson (or something) had
something about it on his webpage. John Cowan may no something more
about this.)
> also that lettre-form that looks like a lower-cased 3 to represent
> accented schwa and/or certain r-coloured vowels.
I do believe this would be the yogh of which you speak. Except that yogh
made the /G/ sound I think. Or was yogh just the letter used for <g>? I
can't remember...
Tristan