On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Garth Wallace <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Perhaps without natlang precedent, but what about <cg> for /g/ in
> positions where <g> would be interpreted as /dZ)/?

Too likely to be interpreted as /kdZ/, I'd say.

As digraphs go, I like <gh>.  The peninsular <gu> just means you wind
up needing yet another diacritic in the form of <gü> for /gu/ or /gw/.

For monographs, I think the hooked form < ɠ > is nice, though perhaps
not sufficiently distinct from bare <g> in some fonts.

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