I already have a few hanzi which appear to be archaic or no longer used in standard Chinese. For example, Amanghu uses 厶 instead of 私, and 弗. It's hard for me to say, as someone who speaks no Chinese and only a little Japanese, what's "rare". Most of the CJK fonts I use have trouble with at least 5% of my lexicon. Just never the same 5%.
I'm still building up simple vocabulary, so at the moment there aren't many very complex hanzi (嗣 is the most complex commonly used one so far). But nothing's off the table. Once I get to specific vocabulary, I'll probably end up with at least a few 30+ stroke characters.
There're two tables on this page, but I'll do my best to recreate it here. As mentioned above, past tense lenitions become more sonorized (that is, more voiced) and more debuccalized (that is, more glottised), while future tense lenitions do the opposite.clawgrip wrote: ↑20 Apr 2018 12:38 I have to say I like how the tenses are represented phonetically through sound changes, but graphically through the use of a separate character.
I did pretty much the same thing in one of my own languages (but for pluralization), but I quite like the way yours works.
Do you have a list of all the sound changes? Are there times when the sound change cannot apply?
I've recreated the tables below. Past tense changes the consonant one step right, future tense changes the consonant one step left.
For verbs begining with stops:
/s/ ⇄ /p/ ⇄ /b/ ⇄ /m/
/s/ ⇄ /pʰ/ ⇄ /bʰ/ ⇄ /m/
/s/ ⇄ /t/ ⇄ /d/ ⇄ /m/
/s/ ⇄ /tʰ/ ⇄ /dʰ/ ⇄ /m/
/x/ ⇄ /k/ ⇄ /g/ ⇄ /n/
/x/ ⇄ /kʰ/ ⇄ /gʰ/ ⇄ /n/
For verbs begining with sibilants, affricates, and approximants:
/s/ ⇄ /ʃ/ ⇄ /ʂ/ ⇄ /x/ ⇄ /h/
/t͡s/ ⇄ /t͡ʃ/ ⇄ /t͡ʂ/ ⇄ /k͡x/ ⇄ /h/
/t͡s/ ⇄ /t͡ʃʰ/ ⇄ /t͡ʂʰ/ ⇄ /k͡xʰ/ ⇄ /h/
/l/ ⇄ /ɻ/ ⇄ /j/ ⇄ /w/ ⇄ /h/
There are a couple of exceptions. 嗣 щуıң /ʂɯ̰ŋ/, the copula "to be" doesn't lenite. Nor do auxillery verbs like 應 ҡѡ̎ң /k͡xóŋ/ "should". Verbs begining with /s, x/ don't have seperate future tense forms.