Print

Print


From: "Christophe Grandsire" <[log in to unmask]>

> > Eh?  It's *very* odd for a conlang to write {ei} for [E] and {e} for
> > [e].
> > Is that what you meant?  Or did you confuse the phonetic symbols?

> Why is it weird? It's basically what French does! (okay, to get [e] you
have to
> add the acute accent: ||, but [E] can definitely be written |ei| - along
with
> |ai|, ||, ||, etc... :)) -) |e| for [e] and |ei| for [E] looks *very
> naturalistic* to me!

I have seen conlangs invented by English-speaking folks that have the value
/ai/ for |i|.

(I also noticed that a lot of people are using my suggested vertical lines
|x| for textual represenation instead of _x_, so apparently I've invented
something meaningful for once....)