'Twas your attitude I'm responding to. I've not been able to find the Americanists, perhaps you need to give me a link, so I can better understand your argument.
You think it's my disregarding it, but even languages like Turkish, Italian, and French change their spelling when it's necessary to have such morphophonological changes.
Ah ah, maybe you're using your own dialect as a 'supradialect' because for me words like Musician have a /j/ in it. I make a distinction between <-cian> and say <shun>, and the /j/ is it.
Now your last statement is an good one to consider. I have thought on that specifically because of issues of dialect vs. standard dialect. My initial thought is to send it out, and then if the dialects merge (as media, television, movies, and the internet are helping do) then there shan't be a problem. I also figure it may also emphasis dialectal difference more and maybe even help promote awareness and acceptance.
You seem keep arguing about it being a system for English speakers to already be used to, but that's not the goal. I know that'd factor in, but if people adopt the system it'd only take a few months to get used to it.
linguoboy wrote:(My emphasis.) I'm sorry you can't tell the difference between "telling what I think" and "whining", but fundamentally that's not my problem.
And if this is your attitude to the mildest constructive criticism, it won't ever be.
See my remarks above. This was the same challenge the Americanists faced and they found a different solution, one that I think is much more intuitive for English speakers. You could at least make an attempt to explain why you feel your solution is superior.
The morphophonological alternation which underlies this "quirk" isn't bad or unnecessary, it's simply a feature of the language. You disregard it (and other features like it) at your peril.
But ci doesn't represent /ʃj/, it represents /ʃ/. There is no phoneme cluster to split. There's a complex interrelationship between the elements of English spelling. You can't assign a symbol a value which it has only in a very specific context (e.g. before i + vowel in Latinate words) and expect this to make any sense to the average user. That's one of the main points of the Zompist article I linked to.
The only alternative to promoting a supradialectal solution is promoting a specific dialect. Given the highly plurilocal nature of modern English, this bias is likely to prevent your system from ever being given a chance.