Tristan McLeay scripsit:

> [r\`] already *is* the retroflex approximant.* In kosher X-SAMPA, [r`] is
> for whatever reason a retroflex tap or flap (i.e. retroflex [4]). Your
> proposal would involve (a) creating a new symbol [4`] for retroflex tap or
> flap

I agree that [4`] is a perfectly intelligible substitute for [r`],
and if anyone wants a retroflex trill, then a local distinction between
[4`] and [r`] is reasonable (labelled as such, naturally).  But CXS and
X-SAMPA are intended to encode the IPA, and the IPA is not intended to
encode every possible speech sound, only the ones which make a phonemic
difference somewhere.  If we use [r`] for the retroflex trill, what
shall we use for the palatal or pharyngeal ones?

> * But note that I've seen Americans using both [r`] and [r\] as shorthands
>   for [r\`].

I write [r\] for my rhotic AmEng "r" not because it's shorter, but because
I do not pronounce this letter retroflex.  Perhaps I should use [@_^`],
(non-syllabic rhotacized schwa) instead, but it's a lot less readable.

Ambassador Trentino: I've said enough. I'm a man of few words.
Rufus T. Firefly: I'm a man of one word: scram!
        --_Duck Soup_                   John Cowan <[log in to unmask]>