It's very difficult, I've found, to romanize languages with large syllable structures. For Old Hlanak'ur (spelling, obviously, may change), which has the largest inventory I've made yet, I'm finding it very hard to romanize unambiguously, phonemically, and beautifully (my three goals for romanizations).
Here's the phonology (no need to worry about vowels; it's just /a i u/):
p b t d c ɟ k ɡ q
pʼ tʼ cʼ kʼ qʼ
m n ɲ ŋ
f v ɬ ɮ ç ʝ x ɣ X
s z ɕ ʑ
sʼ ɕʼ
r l j w
Most of these sounds are fairly easy, but there are a couple that are causing trouble: /ɮ ç ʝ ɣ X ɕ ʑ/, to be specific. I'm currently using hlz hy hj kh ç çz, but most of those are really ugly. Any ideas?
(Also, be careful with digraphs ─ due to syllable structure, almost any two consonants could end up next to each other.
Romanization (please help me)
- Arayaz
- roman
- Posts: 1309
- Joined: 07 Sep 2022 00:24
- Location: Just south of the pin-pen merger
- Contact:
Romanization (please help me)
Proud member of the myopic-trans-southerner-Viossa-girl-with-two-cats-who-joined-on-September-6th-2022 gang
Ruykkarraber languages Ngama Areyaxi languages Arskiilz Kahóra Makihip zAhul 2c2ef0
my garbage
she/her
Ruykkarraber languages Ngama Areyaxi languages Arskiilz Kahóra Makihip zAhul 2c2ef0
my garbage
she/her
Re: Romanization (please help me)
I realize that I'm several months late here, so if you're no longer looking for input, please feel free to ignore this.
Also, there appear to be 7 consonant phonemes, but only 6 letters/digraphs/trigraphs, listed here. Depending on how you're using <kh>, I think that your current way of representing either the voiced velar fricative or the voiceless uvular fricative may be missing. Is the voiceless velar fricative simply /x/ <x>?
Anyway, I personally like /ɕ ç/ <ç hy> the most out of these six. If you're using <ç> for /ɕ/, my first thought would be to use <z̧> for /ʑ/, but I realize that it's not necessarily the easiest to type and that it may not always display properly. Otherwise, especially if <çz> could be either /ʑ/ or /ɕz/, I'd probably use <ś ź> or <š ž> for /ɕ ʑ/. /ʝ/ is tricky, especially given that it contrasts with /ɟ j/. If you're not happy with <hj>, perhaps you could use something like <ý> instead? Would you be open to using <ł> for /ɮ/ instead of <hlz>, especially if <hlz> could also represent /ɬz/?
"beauty" is subjective, of course, but I'll do my best to offer suggestions that align with your other two goals.
Based on "Hlanak'ur", I assume that /ɬ/ is <hl> and that you're using an apostrophe for the ejectives, yes? Are /ɟ j/ <j y>? What are you using for /ɲ ŋ/?
Which of hlz hy hj kh ç çz do you find unappealing? It sounds to me like at least some of them are fine, or am I misinterpreting the way you've worded things?
Also, there appear to be 7 consonant phonemes, but only 6 letters/digraphs/trigraphs, listed here. Depending on how you're using <kh>, I think that your current way of representing either the voiced velar fricative or the voiceless uvular fricative may be missing. Is the voiceless velar fricative simply /x/ <x>?
Anyway, I personally like /ɕ ç/ <ç hy> the most out of these six. If you're using <ç> for /ɕ/, my first thought would be to use <z̧> for /ʑ/, but I realize that it's not necessarily the easiest to type and that it may not always display properly. Otherwise, especially if <çz> could be either /ʑ/ or /ɕz/, I'd probably use <ś ź> or <š ž> for /ɕ ʑ/. /ʝ/ is tricky, especially given that it contrasts with /ɟ j/. If you're not happy with <hj>, perhaps you could use something like <ý> instead? Would you be open to using <ł> for /ɮ/ instead of <hlz>, especially if <hlz> could also represent /ɬz/?
The user formerly known as "shimobaatar".
(she)
(she)