/a e i o u M 2 y/ <a e i o u ı ö ü>
/m n N p b t d k g f v s z s` z` s\ z\ x G h r\ r l w j H tS dZ / <m n ň p b t d k g f v s z š ž č ĵ x ğ h ř r l w y ŷ c j>
High tone is indicated by an acute accent, low tone by a grave, rising by a breve, and falling by a circumflex. If an accent goes on ı, ö, ü, the letter comes first, followed by the diacritic-less letter with a tone mark. Example: üú, öô, ıĭ.

Alveolar consonants preceded by r are often pronounced as retroflex consonants. /r/ intervocalically is /4/. More on allophony soon.

Nouns and verbs will come later, when I'm not as lazy.

Isn't it rather unusual for a language to distinguish so many more POAs in the fricatives (7) than in the stops (4)?

Whoops, I should have added a note: /x/, /G/, and /h/ appear only in Lorošae loanwords.

Do speakers of Jinnic ever substitute native phonemes and, if so, which ones?

In the past, substituting [k_h] for /x/, [g_h] for /G/, and dropping /h/ was common and older loanwords were loaned that way, but in newer loanwords the original Lorošae phonemes are kept. Example: Jinnic "kawro" (originally khawro, Lorošae xawro), but Jinnic fouhız- (Lorošae fouhız-, the dash signifies it's a root and not a word).

By the way, please tell me if I used brackets correctly up there.

The use of brackets is fine, but [g_h] is a rather inexplicable substitution for /G/. In fact, I doubt if it's even phonetically plausible. The "voiced aspirates" of such languages as Hindi and Zulu are more accurately described as being produced with breathy voice (XSAMPA: [_t]). Moreover, it would be far more bizarre to have a single breathy-voiced segment in a language without this contrast that it would be to have a voiced velar fricative.

IME, speakers of language which lack /G/ tend to hear it as [g]. This is the substitution you find in Arabic borrowings into Swahili, for instance, except voiced stops in Swahili are ingressive (e.g.ǥālin > ghali [Gali] or [g_<ali] "expensive") and it's parallel to your substitution of [k_h] for /x/.

Hmm, I've always heard Arabic /G/ loaned into Bengali as [g_t], but it already had that. I suppose [g] would be better in a language that didn't already have [g_t]. Let it be, then!