Unification of Orthography Nov 14, 2017 12:55:54 GMT -6
Post by Sir C. M. Siervicül on Nov 14, 2017 12:55:54 GMT -6
You have to keep in mind that the 2007 Arestada grew out of reforms that were proposed in the context of similar proposals made by Sir Tomás in 2005. He had proposed eliminating å and û on the Republic's language forum (along with î, although it later turned out that his proposal along those lines was phrased somewhat more broadly than he intended). It appeared that the Republican Ladintschen had embraced those proposals, so the 2007 Arestada included those non-orthographical reforms that we thought would be broadly acceptable on both sides of the "Vuode Line" and that also made the general scheme of reliably marking all cases of irregular stress practicable (which would not have been the case had any of the circumflexed vowels or ë been retained). I can't remember whether Sir Tomás proposed anything regarding ë, but we couldn't find any minimal pairs for ë and it appeared to mostly appear in phonologically-conditioned contexts.
Do you have any thoughts on the current stress rule?
That's essentially what the CUG did with rð and ðr (sometime prior to the 2007 Arestada). They realised that sequences /rd/ and /dr/ are always pronounced with [ð], so there was no reason not to respell ð in those contexts as d.
Hool and I discussed that idea at some point, too. It would be very tidy, but wouldn't really do anything to retain pre-2007 aesthetics. And what would you do about the current (and pre-2007) use of ï to mark diaeresis?
Out of time now, I'll have to catch up on page 2 of this thread later!