Print

Print


On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 11:31 AM, David McCann<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Purquì? S' iscrivi "gh" pur /ǰ/ in Liburnes — no teni nigỳn disavantagh.

It's just a convention thing.  I'm used to seeing the spelling "gh"
used to explicitly mark a <g> as "hard" (that is, [g]) where a bare
<g> might possibly be interpreted as "soft" ([dZ]).  So using <gh> to
*mean* [dZ] feels exactly backwards to me.

The other common use for <gh> is of course for [G].

-- 
Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>