Orthographically; why have <ch> for /tʃ/ when you have no <c>? Also, <sh> for /ʃ/ when <h> is /x/ seems weird. It's also very "Englishy". You could use <ç> and <c> for them respectively.
Just a thought.
Nashalq (conlang for hyenafolk)
-
aporaporimos
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2020 4:25 pm
Re: Nashalq (conlang for hyenafolk)
It's English-y on purpose: I like how it looks and it makes it more accessible if I show words to non-linguist friends. Normally I go for one-letter-one-phoneme but that didn't feel right for this language. There's no ambiguity, as <sh> is always /ʃ/, with /s/ only occuring before a vowel.
ἀπόλεμος ὅδε γ' ὁ πόλεμος, ἄπορα πόριμος