On 10/30/2012 7:03 AM, BPJ wrote: > How does that invalidate his express statement that "it > is impossible to make mistakes, unless according to > your own system", or the several pages long manual on > *how to devise Tengwar modes* in Appendix E? He clearly > enjoyed the thought of other people experimenting with > his scripts. He was interested in English spelling > reform, and that is part of the pedigree at least of > the Tengwar. Interesting, I wasn't aware of that. Why so few vowel signs, then? Is it just that there's so much variation in the vowels between English dialects compared with the consonants? If you're going to reform English spelling, the consonants aren't all that bad for the most part, but it's the representation of vowel sounds that really needs work. Jim Allan's book has examples of both orthographical and phonological types of Tengwar spellings of English, including one with extra vowel marks for the different English vowels. I'd probably be more inclined to use a more phonemic approach myself, but the traditional spelling approach does have the advantage of working equally well with any dialect of English.