Re: Plausibility Check

Is anyone willing to give me some feedback on the below points, or has
my flaunting of linguistic history (in speculating on events,
societies, organizations, etc in a hypothetical future) soured too many
people?

I wrote:
I assumed that given their global dominance, Rosetta would be most
influenced by [English, French, Hindi, Mandarin, etc) on all fronts.
Even after centuries and reforms,
their phonological footprint would remain. The sounds of the seed
languages are no longer fully represented in Rosetta, because I've
trimmed away the sounds that were the least common.

Phonology:
Consonants (36): m n n^ N p b t d t. c k g q ? f v T D s z s. z. x h h?
r r<trl> r" l j w<vls> w dz ts ts. dz.
Vowels (16): i y u I U e @<umd> @ o E O" O & &. a a.
(based on sci.lang's FAQ's guideline, as best as I could decipher)

(Note: Devanagari has 34 consonants and 12 vowels represented, so the
numbers I listed for Rosetta are not that unrealistic.)

Which sounds are most likely to collapse into others, near enough that
they might be represented by the same glyph? Particularly vowels. I
have my own guesses, but they're only guesses. I plan on having some
featural elements in the letters, for certain sounds that are likely to
remain distinct enough to warrant it. I have no qualms about a 30+ or
40+ character alphabet, the more the better.

Diphthongs and triphthongs - I'd rather not have any, would this be
doable with some well-placed and carefully considered
diacritics/features?

Given the above seed languages (but remembering that they aren't the
only sources from which Rosetta will inherit), any speculation as to
the characteristics of Rosetta's grammar and vocabulary?

--
DJensen

.