I did this a few years ago. Since Gabriel posted his Slovak and Czech cyrillic I dug this up.

Mind that this is not meant for any serious use because it's strictly done for the purpose of being "perfect" - one symbol for each sound. But t with acute and d with acute looked ugly so I used a caron. Not very consistent in that department, but I made a note that it should really be an acute.

http://www.langmaker.com/index.php?title=User:Iopq/Ukrainian_Latin_Alphabet

there are so many proposals for it that it wouldn't make sense to develop one that would be readily understood by West Slavs since one like that already exists:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euro-Ukrainian_alphabet

I really liked that "Euro-Ukrainian alphabet". Mostly because it makes Ukrainian "look like a real European language". Both logically and esthetically it gives feeling of "mature" and well-fitting writing system.

Alas I can't say the same about your proposal. It looks rather like Slovak Phonetical Alphabet, and hardly can be used for anything other than representation of Ukranian phonetics/phonology. (Though a phonetical alphabet doesn't need "elaborated" letters, apostrophes are quite okay for them.) The letter for dzh' looks especially ugly.

By the way not so long ago I was designing an "etymological" Latin Ukrainian alphabet. Its purpose is to make Ukrainian look more familiar (for me ).

The main idea is the next:

- "Soft sign" becomes apostrophe;
- "Soft" vowels get acute accent mark (i.e. kinda have apostrophe above them): á, é, í, ó, ú;
- Cyrillic i is represented as í, ö, ë depending on etymology (i.e. ö represents "closed" o, and ë represents Yat);
- softening of suffixes ськ and цьк is not marked.
- both "sharp" ґ and "obtuse" г are written g; Cyrillic х is written h.

It looks something like this:

Verhovna rada Ukrajini vöd imení Ukrajinskogo narodu — gromadán Ukrajini vsëh nacíonal'nostej,
- viražajuči suverennu volú narodu,
- spirajučis' na bagatovëkovu istoríju ukrajunskogo deržavotvorenná i na osnovë zdëjsnenogo ukrajins'koju nacíjeju, usim Ukrajinskim narodom prava na samoviznačenná,
- dbajuči pro zabezpečenná prav i svobod lúdini ta gödnih umov jëjë žittá,
- pëklujučis' pro zmöcnenná gromadánskoj zlagodi na zemlë Ukrajini,
- pragnuči rozvivati i zmöcnúvati demokratičnu, socíal'nu, pravovu deržavu,
- usvëdomlújuči vödpovëdal'nöst' pered Bogom, vlasnoju sovëstú, poperedními, ninëšním ta prijdešními pokolënnámi,
- kerujučis' Aktom progološenná nezaležností Ukrajini vöd 24 serpná 1991 roku, shvalenim 1 grudná 1991 roku vsenarodnim golosuvannám,
prijmaje cú Konstitucíju — Osnovnij Zakon Ukrajini.

Personally I think that it isn't correct to represent Ukrainian и and i as y and i, because etymologically и represents both pan-Slavic y and i.

My proposal only wants to map one character for each phoneme.

I made it for just that purpose. This is why I used precisely those letters. I also invented two new letters because no Slavic language had any Latin letters for those sounds, only digraphs.
I also thought about the etymological writing and I would have to disagree with you choices.

1. 'i' appears in closed consonants and instead of yat. The other appearances of 'i' are due to soft consonant + 'y' combinations and some etymological weirdness like 'ь' > 'і'. It also ALWAYS palatalizes no matter what consonant is before it. I'm not sure why you write it í.
2. If you want to have soft vowels, give them a haček.
3. Why aren't suffixes цьк and ськ not marked? Etymologically they had a vowel in those positions (also written ь).
4. ö, ë are terrible letters to use. Most people know that German uses ö for a totally different reason and the rest will be confused by ë not meaning the same as in Russian. Also, in Ukrainian yat has never been pronounced as e so I don't know why it would be written with an e.

You also never mentioned how to represent words like хлопець.

In terms of an etymological writing, I would use:

ǎ, ǔ, ě, for soft letters я, ю, є

again
Ť ť - ть
Ď ď - дь
Ĺ ĺ - ль
Ń ń - нь
Ŕ ŕ - рь
Ś ś - сь
Ź ź - зь
Ć ć - ць

for soft consonants

-ий is just written as y

і from closed consonants: ô as in kôń
і from yat: í because yat was a long vowel as in bíly

words like синій will be spelled syńy since soft vowel + y = і in Ukrainian grammar
слов'янський will be spelled slovǎnśky since a soft v doesn't exist in Ukrainian
бур'ян will be spelled burjan because 'r' could also be soft as in ряд which will be spelled rǎd
давньоукраїнська will be spelled davńoukrajinśka

The writing system I described has a practical purpose, it is intended to make Ukrainian morphology and etymology more obvious for speakers of other Slavic languages. Though (with some revisings) it can serve Ukrainians too.

The other appearances of 'i' are due to soft consonant + 'y' combinations and some etymological weirdness like 'ь' > 'і'.

Of course. That's why I wrote poperedními, ninëšním ta prijdešními — it's "soft и" (not Yat) here.

ö, ë are terrible letters to use.

Yep. I can use circuflexes instead if you like: ô, ê.

It also ALWAYS palatalizes no matter what consonant is before it.

Sure. Though phonetically palatalization is a feature of a consonant, morphologically it belongs to either the consonont or the vowel. Usually we have "consonantal palatalization": it's "owned" by a consonant and mostly is kept while form-changing. But the reflex of Yat and the Closed O has "vocal palatalization": it forces softening of the vowel whether it's "genetically" soft or not. I decided to distinguish these two kinds of palatalization: the consonantal one is marked with acute/apostrophe and the vocal one with... er, circumflex.

If you want to have soft vowels, give them a haček.

There are too many soft vowels in Ukrainian; and the caron is too outstanding character. A text looks funny when it has so many "brows". Also, acute accent looks somewhat similar to the soft sign — apostrophe.

3. Why aren't suffixes цьк and ськ not marked? Etymologically they had a vowel in those positions (also written ь).

Mostly because it looks terrible. (It's okay to have something like Ukrajinśkyj, but Ukrajins'kij looks too "broken".) I tried to avoid using of apostrophe within words. You tell me that it's etymological? Then why it isn't presented in any other Slavic language? Germans don't mark "special" pronunciation of suffix -ig either, and I thought it would be okay in Ukrainian too.

You also never mentioned how to represent words like хлопець.

What's difficult here? Hlopec' of course. Or I didn't get something?

Also, in Ukrainian yat has never been pronounced as e so I don't know why it would be written with an e.

Because in all the other Slavic languages it's presented as something like e, 'e, je, ije here (and sometimes ja in Bulgarian).

Look at how it looks:

žovtij	siníj
žovta	siná
žovto	siné
žovtê	sinê

kôn', koná, konú (koneví) etc.
sôl', solí, sôllú etc.

Using of this spelling makes Ukrainian morphology a bit more reasonable (though you still have to keep in mind that soft o becomes é, not ó).

Ah, but e in other languages is a REFLEX of yat
yat was a letter with a pronunciation between a and e

most languages shifted the sound to 'e (palatalization + e)
Ukrainian shifted the sound to 'i (palatalization + i)
Bulgarian shifted the sound to 'a (palatalization + i) which is not surprising considering it's a sound IN BETWEEN e and a

But other languages did the same thing as Ukrainian, like the Ikavski dialect of Serbocroatian
lipo, vrime
So why should it be written e?
1. It's not pronounced e.
2. It was never pronounced e.
3. Not all reflexes of yat are e.

It would make as much sense to have an e there as it would to have an a.

Sure, it would benefit more people to write an e than it would to write an a (East Bulgarian reflex - which is Standard Bulgarian) or an i (Ikavski dialect of Serbocroatian, sometimes Czech) but an i would indicate the correct pronunciation WITHOUT breaking morphological Ukrainian features

Writing the closed o as i WOULD break morphology slightly - more rules are necessary. To write proper Ukrainian one needs to know over a hundred spelling and pronunciation rules. Most of them deal with voicing and assimilation.


Gabriel:
You tell me that it's etymological? Then why it isn't presented in any other Slavic language?
===========================================================
Same reason why most Slavic languages say serce instead of serdce.

might as well write žołto to indicate hard l > v change in Ukrainian

Also add v with acute above to write the word свято (in this case pronounced with a soft v, I forgot about that)

most languages shifted the sound to 'e (palatalization + e)
Ukrainian shifted the sound to 'i (palatalization + i)
Bulgarian shifted the sound to 'a (palatalization + i) which is not surprising considering it's a sound IN BETWEEN e and a

Er... I didn't get the last point. I guess you meant 'a (palatalization + a). And what is "IN BETWEEN e and a"? Anyway, Bulgarian sometimes has ja reflexes of Yat, and the western dialects don't have them at all.

If I remember correctly Ikavski dialect is hardly spoken by anyone, and isn't used for writing.

So why should it be written e?
1. It's not pronounced e.
2. It was never pronounced e.
3. Not all reflexes of yat are e.

As I aready said, my spelling system is intended to make Ukrainian look more familiar and understandable for other Slavs. And since ALL the rest of Slavs have e in this position the answer is obvious.

Also, as I said, the system with some revisings can be used by Ukrainians. The "Ukrainian-oriented" system could have î instead ê. Most cases of Cyrillic i should be written í; the closed ô should be left when it's still "swaps" to o only; and reflex of yat should be marked in the endings only.

might as well write žołto to indicate hard l > v change in Ukrainian

Yeah, it's a good idea. Having words like жовтий isn't enough to bring in a new letter, but it would be really useful for past tense endings:

bačił, bačila, bačilo, bačili

This is the sound that hard e has in Slavic languages: ɛ in IPA, an open-mid vowel
This is the sound that hard a has in Slavic languages: a in IPA, an open vowel

the sound of yat in proto-Slavic was ćː, a long near-open vowel

a near-open vowel is in between an open and an open-mid vowel, and its tongue positioning is between near front (which ɛ is) and central (which a is)
it is also the pronunciation of a in the English word fat
it's not like fet or how fat would be pronounced in Slavic

btw, hardly anyone speaks Czech

(Windows-1250)

Yes, Czech sometimes reflects yat as í, but the forms with ě are well known, too. We have bílý (white), but bělejší (whiter); dítě (child), but děti (children); "mlyatko" became mlíko in Bohemian dialect, but mléko in standard Czech (it couldn't become *mlěko because there is no soft l in Czech).

don't forget a couple other words like díla (related to děla)
what about the relation of the word tílko to nátělník?
btw if L can't be soft how do you explain the word líp? As in tím líp

looks like to make Ukrainian orthography make more sense to Czech readers, yat should be written as í!

Czech has dělo ("cannon"; don't know what it's derived from) and dílo ("a work") derived from dělat ("to do", "to work"). The nominative plurals of these two nouns are correctly děla and díla; this difference was unforunately not retained in other plural cases, so for example bez děl can mean both "without cannons" and "without works".

The words tílko and nátělník are synonyms (they both mean "vest") and are derived from the expression na těle ("on the body").

The word líp is again a Bohemian dialectical one, the standard form is lépe ("in a better way"). So I guess that there was some proto-Slavic word "lyatpe". The letter l isn't soft; in Czech, ě/i/í really soften only preceding d, t and n, never preceding l.

Ah so I'm guessing the http://www.slovnik.cz/ dictionary also lists what you call "dialectal Bohemian" forms

Yes, it does.

na těle also comes from tѣlo

just copy and paste yat from my posts :D I was at first confused by your writing yat in the middle of a word

Notice that Polish sometimes has a ia reflex of ѣ as in сiаɫо

We don't need latin.

And we don't need azbuka.

and we need Cyrillic, Latin and for mathematics some Greek letters too

And arabic numbers, too.

Problem with Slavic linguists is that they want to be perfect, perfectly writing all the nuances of pronunciation. That is not done in any language, and that makes Slavic languages over-complicated. Slovio solutio to use as simple spelling as possible, in order to keep things simple is the best. The nuances of pronunciation are left up to the speakers, allowing various accents, dialects and variability, which is perfectly normal for 400 million Slovic speakers.

I'm sorry, but if writing which letter is soft and which letter is hard is a nuance, then enjoy words like izmenat (is it change or mash??), nuhat, konušna, pluvat

Igor:
is it change or mash??
===
Do you know that the word "change" has more than 45 and the word "mash" about 10 different meanings in English?

Slovio and English have two great things in common, namely:

1. The orthography is almost the same everywhere and

2. the pronunciation is different everywhere.

And these are preconditions for any world language!


Eugeniusx

another reason why Slovianski is good for nothing

Yes, another language with a terrible orthography that's based solely on Slovak orthography.

What´s wrong with an orthography which can be understood by Slaves within a few minutes?

Sorry! English orthograhpy, of course Slavs!

I'm sorry, I don't understand Slovio orthography after a year

Slovio website says:
Vowels: a, e, i, o, u - more or less as in Italian, Spanish, Polish, German.
but i in tiaga is non-syllable-forming (OK, so it's like Polish?) but is non-palatalizing as well (so not like Polish)
because if it was palatalizing it would be spelled tqiaga or t'iaga

since obviously Slovio doesn't have an y letter, and those Slavic languages that lack this letter have a non-palatalizing i (South slavic)
now if it was in fact palatalizing, how do you tell? Is there a rule like only t, l, d, n (the first four letters I included on the soft letter list in Slovianski) are palatalized by i?


this is not a small difference!

Here is a list of Russian words differing only by soft consonants (phonetic notation):
a. Before back vowels
mat 'foul language' m'at 'crumpled (past part.)'
rat 'glad' r'at 'row'
vol 'ox' v'ol 'he led'
nos 'nose' n'os 'he carried'
nu-ka 'now then!' n'uxa 'scent (gen.sg.)'
suda 'court of law (gen.sg.)' s'uda 'here, this way'
b. Word-finally
mat 'foul language mat' 'mother'
krof 'shelter' krof' 'blood'
ugol 'corner' ugol' '(char)coal'
v'es 'weight' v'es' 'entire'
c. Before another consonant
polka 'shelf' pol'ka 'polka'
tanka 'tank (gen.sg.)' tan'ka (name)
v'etka 'branch' f'et'ka (name)
gorka 'hill' gor'ko 'bitterly'

Please tell me which consonants in Slovio are soft and which are hard
and you must understand that NO slavic language has all hard consonants without the soft

Igor:
I'm sorry, I don't understand Slovio orthography after a year
===
How could you? Since you still do not understand your own Slovianski orthography?


kak ja davnuo skazal Slovianski to viecxnju Bausxtela (=building side (Polonized German word))

"Why so complicated?


Problem with Slavic linguists is that they want to be perfect, perfectly writing all the nuances of pronunciation. That is not done in any language, and that makes Slavic languages over-complicated..."


don`t agree

we have Serbian language!

I modelled Slovianski spelling after Serbian. But it's less phonetic, because Serbian sometimes shows loss of voicing and sometimes doesn't.
BeograDski not Beogratski

so I also write obšči not opšči

Igor pisal:
I modelled Slovianski spelling after Serbian. But it's less phonetic, because Serbian sometimes shows loss of voicing and sometimes doesn't.
===
As far as I know it was Ondrej Recxnik, who´s mother tongue was Serbocroatian, who "created" the Slovio copy "Slovianski"!

Nevertheless, a genuine all-Slavic language must not be based on only one Slavic language, this would discriminate all the others. I.e. we need a simplified spelling NOT based on any existing Slavic language. And any person has to have the right to pronounce it as he likes it, and not according to some "linguistic" eggheads.

The best simplified spelling for a all-Slavic language, I do know, is still SLOVIO.

I wish you all a nice sliding into the New Year. All the best for 2008.

Greetings from Watford, England

Eugeniusx

BTW, in this topic iopq claimed that Czech has i-reflexes of Yat.

But Gabriel mentions "Bohemian" word mlíko, and I can also add the word bříza. None of these words had Yat sound (in Ukrainian these words are moloko and bereza). It looks like in Czech the sounds /e/ and Yat merged first, and only after that some of them became /i/. I.e. development of Czech phonology has nothing to di with the one of Ukrainian, even though sometimes it gives similar results.

---

Do rečê, u côj temê iopq zajavił ščo čeśka mova maje i-refleksi golosnogo jať.

Ale Gabriel zgaduje bogemśko slovo mlíko, a ja možu takož dodati slovo bříza (ukrajinśkoju cê slova je "moloko" ta "bereza"). Zdajesá ščo u čeśkôj movê zvuki /e/ ta jať spočatku zlilisá, a tôľko pôslá togo dejakê vôd jih stali /i/. To je rozvitok čeśkoji fonologíji ne maje níčogo spôľnogo z Ukrajinśkoju, hoč inkoli i daje podobnê rezuľtati.

Čeśka mova maje refleksy kombinacíj dejakyx pryholosnyx i holonyx jak "i" ta "í"

Jakščo bula mjaka pryholosna jaka stala tverdoju pered e, čy jať, čy ju (jak u slovî plivat), čy inšymî holosnymî, čeśka mova maje zamisť tyx holosnyx i čy í

Pomylky: ty pyšeš graty i hraty jak grati, ale vony okremy slova
zajavił ta ukrajinśkoju... čy i = и čy ji = ї, obydva ne majuť sensu, krašče jí = ї, ale nabagato krašče y = и
Zdajesá = zdajeťśa
tôľko = tôľky
podobnę = podôbnî

-----------------------------------
Ja ne rozumęju tvojih zaperečeń. I jaka korisť vôd akutnogo akcentu u jí?
-----------------------------------
Tomu ščo litera и ukrajinśkoju čytajeťśa jak MFA (mîžunarodnyj fonetyčnyj alfavit) [ɪ], a litera і čytajeťśa jak MFA [i]. Jak vymovĺajeťśa ї? Napevno [ji]. Jakščo ty pyšeš i = [ɪ], a í = [i], to majže [ji] povyneno buty jí?




-----------------------------------
I ce robiť golosnu i jak bezposrednú ta regulárnu refleksíju jatá uníkaľnoju osoblivôstú ukrajinśkoji movi.
-----------------------------------
Ta j dejakyx serbśko-horvaťśkyx hovoriv.

-----------------------------------
Jedinoju osoblivôstú tvojeji sistemi ščo mne ne podobajeťsá je to jak ti vikoristovuješ líteru y.
-----------------------------------
Tôľky praslovjanśka mova mala и ta ы. Sučasna ukrajinśka vymovl'aje obydvî jak vymovĺalaśa ы.