Wouldn't <c'> be logical for /ts'/.TwistedOne151 wrote:Given the following consonant inventory, does the romanization I have (in the angle brackets) seem alright?
Nasals: /m n/ <m n>
voiced: /b d g/ <b d g>
voiceless: /p t k ʔ/ <p t k '>
ejective: /tʼ kʼ qʼ/ <t' k' q'>
voiceless: /t͡ɬ ʈ͡ʂ t͡ɕ q͡χ/<tl č ć qh>
ejective: /t͡sʼ t͡ɬʼ ʈ͡ʂʼ t͡ɕʼ/ <ts' tl' č' ć'>
voiced: /z ʐ ʑ ʁ/ <z ž ź gh>
voiceless: /f s ɬ ʂ ɕ χ h/ <f s lh š ś kh h>
Liquids: /r l/ <r l>
Semivowels: /j w/ <y w>
Any suggested changes? <x> instead of <kh> for /χ/ perhaps (and then <qx> for /q͡χ/)? Something other than <gh> for /ʁ/? Digraphs of some kind rather than accents for the retroflexes and alveolopalatals? Or does it work well enough as is?
<ł> instead of <lh> if you want to avoid digraphs.
I personally like <j> instead of <y> that's a matter of taste.
The voiced uvular fricative is always problematic.