my preference for translitteration from cyrilic to latin alphabet is based on the resemblance of letters.
the cyrilic letter for cx is similar to y, and y is not yet used.
the cyrilic letter for zx is similar to x, and x is not yet used as letter.
the cyrilic letter for sx is similar to w, and w is not yet used.
additionaly, gx can be q, and q is not yet used. and wx can be wy.
this translitteration system is practical for making busy the latin letters y, x, w, q, and for reminding the cyrilic originals.
not only that! the fonema zx is very frecuent in slovio, more frecuent than some fonemas expressed by a simple letter.
It´s really nice watching your pathological hatred against Slovio´s orthography. In fact you never were able to present a better proposal. In fact Slovio´s "cx, sx and zx" are better than its Polish archetype.
If you go to: http://www.slovio.com/1/0.slovio/index.html#flexible-grammar you will learn why the apostrophy is not such a good idea. The main problem is the confusion created by ASCII codes and various keyboards. There are about six different signs which look like ' but are not. It would only create more confusion. The ' does not exist on all keyboards.
As far as is concerned the Slovio spelling and orthography it is possible to replace "x" with and apostrophe. Once more, we warn users that on diffeerent keyboards there are several similar-looking apostrophies, which have different ASCII codes and that the end result may look on different computers very different, even illegible.....
Once again, it doesn't matter if " the apostrophe " would look like this ' or this ` or this ´
´
Any kind of apostrophe behind of c, s, z is acceptable.
you are right Ioannes Why should we use the simple and very easy to understand cx,sx and zx of Slovio if we can confuse the issue with using apostrophe and what not more!
I
Mathematical signs x, y and z stand normally alone, therefore there is no mix up with polish´ cz and Slovio´s cx
II
Apostrophes mean a lot in different languages even it is used in mathematics
na primer: (a) 25° 10´ 5", here it means minutes; (b) Eugeniusx´, here it does indicate property; (c) can´t, ´n, here it shows the short from of words; (d) m and m` indicating that m´is different from m ... itd...
III
Russians use e.g. the letter C as S, H as N, Y as U, P as R and B as V, so shall we eliminate this letters from our helping language?
It's no so unambiguously what you wrote. It would be OK if you used just numerals but if you use
the words e.g. some physical quantities or mathematical word utterance of some equation, it could collide with ambiguity of expressions (using full words instead of maths or physics abbreviations
by using multiplying something with sigh X )
Using ' (apostrophe) for minutes is bound just with numerals. You cannot use it with words themselves.
It is never written e.g.
forty-eight ° thirty '
It is used just with numerals and that's why it cannot collide with the meaning of softening or letters.
On the other hand sign / letter X is used too often in physics, maths, chemistry and other fields of science.
I have nothing against cx, sx, and zx except for the fact that no Slavic language know them
at least with č, š, ž we're reaching Slovaks, Czechs, Slovenians, Croatians, Bosnians, Serbs, and Montenegrins
ч, ж, ш are known to everyone who uses cyrillic, so it is a better fit and I'm sure you agree
Ioannes, because I believe that any new WRITTEN language should have its own typeface. Look at the not yet official typeface of Silesian language (spoken in Poland, Czechia and Germany):
Afrika – drůgi pod wzglyndym wjelgośći kůntynynt na Źymi, mo 30,316 mln km˛ powjeřchńi, čyli 20,3% uůgůlnej powjeřchńi lůndowyj našygo globu. Zamješkuje go 14% populacyji Źymi t.j. 920 mln ludźi (2006)...
