tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-669622867280630963.post7430398411578601780..comments2013-10-01T22:00:05.911-03:00Comments on Kareyku: PhoneticsDro. Esplorantohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01669332568523067135noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-669622867280630963.post-21061781902463094512010-06-17T22:40:52.611-03:002010-06-17T22:40:52.611-03:00It is a little odd, but it's just how I wanted...It is a little odd, but it's just how I wanted it to look, so... merely taste. I prefer the sh and ch written thus and the 'th' like that. Just a matter of aesthetics to me. I could also always revert ŝ and ĉ to sh and ch. I didn't use c because I don't want to create confusion about c being /ts/ or /ch/ or /k/.Dro. Esplorantohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01669332568523067135noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-669622867280630963.post-54844537527273163592010-06-17T11:57:37.361-03:002010-06-17T11:57:37.361-03:00Interesting phonology.
I don't know if this i...Interesting phonology. <br />I don't know if this is your actual script or if this is just a latinised version, but isn't it odd to use both diacritics and digraphs? E.g. ŝ and th? Not that it bothers me, but you might consider going digraphs only. Even more curious, though, is that you use ĉ for /tʃ/. Why don't you just use c?SLiVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06647919251584517466noreply@blogger.com