Print

Print


On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 13:56:56 -0700, Stone Gordonssen
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I'm curious to know indivual's perferences with regards to using the latin
>alphabet for certain orthographic mappings.
>
>E.g.
>[ts] could be rendered _ts_ or _z_ so long as any reader is prewarned of
>either mapping and orthographic ambiguities could be resolved. The same with
>[S] as _x_ or _sh_, etc.

My personal preference would be for {c} rather than {z}, if for some reason
I need to have a single letter for [t_s]. I settled on c with a dot over it
for the romanization of Tirelat, or "tz" for the ASCII version ("tz" rather
than "ts" to avoid confusion with /t/ + /s/). But if I didn't need to avoid
confusion with /ts/, I'd probably just write "ts".

It really depends on the language and the whole set of phonemes in the
language. I use "rs" to write a voiceless retroflex fricative in Zharranh
and Lindiga, but "hr" in the new "Zircon" language. In Tilya, because I
wanted to use single letters of the Latin alphabet for everything, I
spelled /t_S/ as {q} and /d_Z/ as {c}.