"Peter Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > May I remind you of the following, my reply to Charles, on this list > this today: > > Not a good idea: the Nogai and Khakass languages appear to have used both > > gha/oi and "i with lower right hook" according to > > http://www.writingsystems.net/languages/nogai/nogailatin.htm and > > http://www.writingsystems.net/languages/khakass/khakasslatin.htm .
I remember it: you state the distinction between gha/oi and i with lower right hook. But I thought it had nothing in common with the actual distinctions in Azeri (keep out the Gua/oi letter which is a variant of g). We are discussing here about the distinction between the Latin soft sign (b with top serifs) and the Latin i with lower right hook, no ? I do agree that we have a distinction between them, but that it could be possible to represent this distinction with a dotless i and a diacritic like the combining retroflex hook below. The "retroflex" term would be misleading here, but do we have a better "unified" term to designate it? After all we also have the same diacritic used to designate a French tr�ma, an English diaeresis, a German umlaut, a Cyrillic vowel inflexion, and a Greek koronis which all have distinct functions but are encoded the same or considered canonically equivalent... Same idea for the existing unification of the Greek tonos and the Latin accute accent...
