WI: Latin-based/derived Glagolitic/Cyrillic

That said, I don't think that Romance orthography can change Slavic languages orthography. For instance, all Germanic languages use the Greek letter K (being English the only one that also uses the 'hard c' IIRC) even though Classical Latin never really used K in a regular basis. Thus, this Slavic alphabet will probably use K for /k/ like Germans and keep C for /ts/ and a C-diacritc for /tch/. Or, if you want something more ATL, we can use X (/ks/ in Latin) to represent /ts/ or /tch/, what do you think?

Well, unlike the Germans, we don't have much in the way of Slavic orthography at this time, and assuming scenarios where the Slavs attempt to curtail the activities of Germanic missionaries and look towards Rome itself (such as with Great Moravia and Poland OTL), we have a decent-enough argument for the possibility of C having the /k/, albeit without any of the further rules which existed in Romance orthography, which leads to the use of K or even Q. Utilizing X for /ts/ though would possibly be an interesting proposition, and would certainly make the writing of words that start with the sound look rather odd.

In Medieval Latin and in Modern Romance Languages C can have both the /s/ and /k/ sounds, before A, O, U it has a /k/ sound and before E and I it has a /s/ sound, occasionally, when we do pronounce a /s/ before A, O or U, we use Ç, like in français. That's the rule for Portuguese and French (there are probably some more nuances in Catalan and Occitan but I'm not familiar with those languages).

Actually, Mediaeval Latin varied <c> before front vowels as /ts/ to /tsh/, later being predominantly /tsh/ like Tuscan and Romanian. It's why it has a /ts/ sound in German because they picked it up from Church.
I do agree that any Slavic is more likely to use <k> for /k/ and <c> for /ts/.
Since the scribes in Britain added cross bars and merged letters for Angle and Saxon ones not in Latin I see no reason the same won't happen for Slavic.

I'm talking about research on variant spellings used by scholars of the various Romance dialects/language and comparative linguistics. These tend to highlight <ci> being pronounced <tsi>. The "offshoot" Ecclesiastical or Church Latin tends to be highly influenced by various Italian dialects.

Though if Medieval/Ecclesiastical Latin of the time used /ts/ for C, then I guess it would make most sense for it to turn up as C in this hypothetical alphabet; so if that is the case, then C is /ts/ and K is /k/ for this Slavic Latin.

Now, this does lead us into the possible appearance of /tɕ/, /ʈʂ/ and other such similar sounds, recognizable to those who use /tʃ/ in their collection of pronunciations. Since we've already thrown out the possibility of newly created letters, we could assume the creation of digraphs and/or use of diacritics in this case, or even perhaps the use of X as Lampiao suggested earlier (though with the wide array of sounds Slavic has, it may find use elsewhere).

The letters B, D, F, N, I, P, T and possibly G and R would more than likely remain the same, but I wonder over the letters H, L, V, U, Y, J, and S, as well as W and Q, since I'm unaware for their pronunciations at the time (though the last two would probably find new uses in this alphabet, since /w/ isn't a common sound in Slavic languages and K already uses /k/).
 
Top