IYHO or are there objective calculations? (in my speech, /k/ and /t/ sound alike enough that this seems to the most common misunderstanding and fricatives seem to be mangled by telephone lines in my completely subjective opinion) On Tuesday 19 July 2011 23:01:37 David Peterson wrote: > /p/ and /k/ are more easily confused than /t/ and /k/. /s/ and /f/ are more > distinct than /s/ and /ʃ/ or /f/ and any other weak fricative (e.g. /θ/ or > /h/ or /x/). And those are present only if you need them. Myself, I'd > stick with /a/, /i/, /s/, /t/, /k/ and /l/. > > David Peterson > LCS President > [log in to unmask] > www.conlang.org > > On Jul 19, 2011, at 2◊56 PM, Mechthild Czapp wrote: > > I have to admit being confused. To me, having both /t/ and /k/ as well > > as both /s/ and /f/ make no sense as IMNSCO these are easiest > > confusable. > > > > On Tuesday 19 July 2011 22:33:32 you wrote: > >> Honestly, I'd stick with two vowels, /a/ and /i/, one fricative (doesn't > >> matter which), and two stops: /t/ and either /p/ or /k/. If you need > > > > more, > > > >> /l/. If you need even more than that, have two fricatives: one /s/, > > > > and > > > >> one weak fricative (/f/ or /h/). More, add /u/. I think that should be > >> enough. > >> > >> David Peterson > >> LCS President > >> [log in to unmask] > >> www.conlang.org > >> > >> On Jul 19, 2011, at 2◊00 PM, Mechthild Czapp wrote: > >>> Hejida hakim, uhigini, > >>> > >>> I am thinking of a new conlang and I want it to be easy to > > > > understand > > > >>> even in a noisy setting or over a bad connection (like a skype > >>> connection where one person uses dialup :) ). One of my ideas > > > > are a > > > >>> LOT of free variation. The other is not to use 'similar' phonemes. > > > > I have > > > >>> decided to retain voice contrast but I wonder whether this > > > > makes > > > >>> sense. > >>> > >>> Apart from that: which phonemes sound alike to you in noisy > >>> environments?