tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jun 24 09:06:31 2009
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Michael Everson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
On 24 Jun 2009, at 16:27, Russ Perry, Jr. wrote:
> Not to spark a whole new debate, but...
> On Wed, 6/24/09, Michael Roney, Jr. <email@example.com> wrote:
>> q - k
>> Q - q
>> tlh - x
> I wonder why the originators of this mapping didn't do this instead:
> q - q
> Q - x
> tlh - k
That's a lot nicer, I think.
> ...as it leaves "q" alone, and makes "tlhIngan" closer to "klingon".
> Then only "x" and "f" for "ng" seem particularly odd given the
> Okrandian system (i.e. ch - c, gh - g, S - s, etc, mappings read
> pretty straightforwardly).
"f" for "ng" isn't so strange as it is next to "g".
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
- Re: pIqaD
- From: "Russ Perry, Jr." <firstname.lastname@example.org>