Print

Print


Quoting Jrg Rhiemeier <[log in to unmask]>:

[snip Nanoling inventory and transcription]
>
> The system looks weird to someone not used to it, and the tetragraphs
> are cool!  But it has its own inner logic.  I like it!
> (But how are [kw] and [q] distinguished in writing?  They both
> transcribe as _co_.)

The syllable structure isn't set in stone yet, but I'm leaning towards CVN,
where N=nasal, so that particular ambiguity won't arise. You'd, however, get
much the same for medial [Nw] and [N\] - both are _o_. I'm figuring I'll
simply leave it in - ambuigity isn't exactly unknown in natlangs'
orthographies, and no reason Nanoling's should be less ambiguous than
Meghean's, is there?

                                                            Andreas