My private romanization of Arabic

[LetoAtreides]

What do you think of it ?

VOWELS

/a/ - a, /a:/ - aa
/i/ - i, /i:/ - ii
/u/ - u, /u:/ - uu

CONSONANTS

/b/ -b
/t/ - t
/d/ - d
/tˁ/ - tv
/dˁ ~ ɮˁ/ - dv
/ʤ ~ ɟ/ - j
/k/ - k
/q/ - q
/Ɂ/ - e
/f/ - f
/θ/ - ś
/ð/ - ź
/ðˁ/ - źv
/s/ - s
/z/ - z
/sˁ/ - sv
/ʃ/ - ş
/x/ - x
/ɣ/ - g
/ħ/ - ħ
/ʕ/ - ġ
/h/ - h
/m/ - m
/n/ - n
/l/ - l
/r/ - r
/w/ - w
/j/ - j

[Arzemju]

Most of characters shown up as numbers for me, but for what dialect is this exactly for? (or is it MSA?)

[LetoAtreides]

Most of characters shown up as numbers for me, but for what dialect is this exactly for? (or is it MSA?)

It is for MSA or for Koranic Arabic. I don't know much about non-standard varieties.

[Wanderer]

In my opinion, a digraph with <v> for pharyngealization is very unnatural. Also,

/Ɂ/ - e

That's even weirder.

[Arzemju]

In my opinion, a digraph with <v> for pharyngealization is very unnatural. Also,

/Ɂ/ - e

That's even weirder.

Agreed.

Also, why no uses of apostrophes? seems better for the Glottal stop than <e>, most of us will misread it as /e/

[LetoAtreides]

In my opinion, a digraph with <v> for pharyngealization is very unnatural. Also,

/Ɂ/ - e

That's even weirder.

Agreed.

Also, why no uses of apostrophes? seems better for the Glottal stop than <e>, most of us will misread it as /e/

Most romanizations of Arabic use apostophes for glottal stops and dots below letters for emphatic consonants. I wanted to introduce some variation.

The <e> is skipped between vowels and in word-initial position (islaam not eislaam), so there are fewer possibilities of confusion.

[masako]

I don't think the use of <v> makes any sense at all. Also, the uses of the acute accent all seem very random and unusual.

[LetoAtreides]

There are no acute accents in this orthography, except of <ś ź> for interdental fricatives.

As for emphatic consonants, how about using <ť ď ṡ ż> instead of the v-digraphs ?

[masako]

There are no acute accents in this orthography, except of <ś ź> for interdental fricatives.

So, there are acute accents in this orthography, but there aren't??

[LetoAtreides]

There are no acute accents in this orthography, except of <ś ź> for interdental fricatives.

So, there are acute accents in this orthography, but there aren't??

Only two of them, yet you're talking as if there were thousands.

[masako]

There are no acute accents in this orthography, except of <ś ź> for interdental fricatives.

So, there are acute accents in this orthography, but there aren't??

Only two of them, yet you're talking as if there were thousands.

Really?

Also, the uses of the acute accent all seem very random and unusual.

That sounds like I'm implying something unrealistic and absurd to you? Maybe I should have said both instead of all, but I think your reaction is a bit much TBH.

[Thakowsaizmu]

/tˁ/ - tv
/dˁ ~ ɮˁ/ - dv
/ʤ ~ ɟ/ - j
/Ɂ/ - e
/θ/ - ś
/ð/ - ź
/ðˁ/ - źv
/sˁ/ - sv
/ħ/ - ħ
/ʕ/ - ġ
/j/ - j

Why? I mean, aside from the very counterintuitive (and unæsthetically pleasing) /θ/ - ś and /ð/ - ź, you have 'j' twice, and for rather different sounds. Again, I find that rather counterintuitive. Really, though, I just think it's ugly.

[LetoAtreides]

you have 'j' twice, and for rather different sounds

I made a mistake, it ought to be <y> for /j/.

[MrKrov]

There are no acute accents in this orthography, except of <ś ź> for interdental fricatives.

So, there are acute accents in this orthography, but there aren't??

Only two of them, yet you're talking as if there were thousands.

Sano has problems with the concept of exceptions. It's okay! He's got a condition.

[masako]

Irrelevant to his self-contradiction and to this discussion.

[MrKrov]

Actually it's totally relevant as it's the reason you're seeing the imaginary contradiction.

[masako]

Actually it's totally relevant as it's the reason you're seeing the imaginary contradiction.

No, it is irrelevant because this: "There are no acute accents in this orthography, except of <ś ź> for interdental fricatives." is a contradiction...to say there are none of something and then list them is contradictory.

If he had said instead, 'There are only two, used for interdental fricatives.' when he was voicing his protest to my statement of: "Also, the uses of the acute accent all seem very random and unusual." then I would not have asked: "So, there are acute accents in this orthography, but there aren't??"

The use of the word "except" does not nullify or even reduce a contradiction.

[MrKrov]

Uh yeah it would. That's kinda what an exception is. Like I said: Sano doesn't grasp exceptions.

[masako]

Uh yeah it would. That's kinda what an exception is. Like I said: Sano doesn't grasp exceptions.

I think you have mistaken me for the topic.

______________________________________________________

"There is no water in this bucket except for these 3 gallons."

vs.

"There are only 3 gallons in this bucket."

[Maximillian]

Is "I see nothing, except of these six white roses" a self-contradicting statement?