Quoting [log in to unmask]:

> 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,

That's me!

> 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.

While distinguishing _every_ possible speech sound would be pretty much
possible, from the conlanging POV it's rather unfortunate that the IPA isn't
aiming more along such lines.

> If we use [r`] for the retroflex trill, what
> shall we use for the palatal or pharyngeal ones?

Kirshenbaumian <trl> would be a possibility. Ugly as an ugly thing on a bad
day, admitedly. _` as someone suggested could work too, but doesn't look much