Re: letters with palatal hook

From: Peter_Constable@sil.org
Date: Wed Apr 02 2003 - 16:03:46 EST

  • Next message: Peter_Constable@sil.org: "Re: ogonek vs. retroflex hook"

    Ken Whistler wrote on 04/02/2003 01:47:22 PM:

    > I still think that is the most consistent way to deal with some
    > set of Latin letters with palatal hooks.
    >
    > However, I would like to see indication, for the list that Peter
    > is assembling, that these are, indeed, in some established
    > orthographic practice

    With the assistance of John Wells, I've got samples from three different
    sources on Russian (two linguistic studies on Russian phonetics, and one
    didactic item on Russian) that use very similar inventories:

         | Ward | Jones & Ward | Boyanus & Jopson |
    -----------------------------------------------|
    b | x | x | x |
    d | x | x | x |
    f | x | x | x |
    g | x | x | x |
    k | x | x | x |
    l | x | x | x |
    m | x | x | x |
    n | x | x | x |
    p | x | x | x |
    r | x | x | x |
    s | x | x | x |
    esh | | | x |
    t | x | x | x |
    v | x | x | x |
    x | x | | |
    z | x | x | x |

    The only possible questions appear to be about the esh and x.

    - Peter

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Peter Constable

    Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
    7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
    Tel: +1 972 708 7485



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 02 2003 - 16:54:05 EST