Hello,
Final aspirates are not allowed in Sanskrit so most probably final \1893 "ṗ (ph)" is not possible and \1892 "p" should be possible.
It should be mentioned here that \1892 and \182B are originally the same letter. According to this logic we should also have two "z" (\183D) , "c" (\183C) to use them separately for borrowings and Sanskrit transcriptions.
Jargal
On Oct 26, 2015, at 9:51 PM, Greg Eck <greck@postone.net> wrote:
> OK, sounds good.
> Glad to hear that we have the Inner Mongolian expert’s counsel on Ali Gali.
> Greg
> >>>>>
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 3:47 PM
> Subject: RE: U+1892/1893
>
> Sorry for my response late. I was trying to confirm this with Professor Shonghor and Professor Batu in Academy of Social Sciences in
> Inner Mongolia. They are ALI-GALI expert I am referencing. But I was not able to contact in these two days yet.
> As my memory, it seam there no final form documented for these ALI-GALI characters as well.
>
> But I know all of these characters are created by imitating the Mongolian Character U+182B_PA or U+1839_FA or U+182A_BA etc.
> According to the original character’s writing rule, if these character not defined the final form, we have selected the same tails with the original characters.
> It will be beatify the Mongolian Script’s writing.
> If any linguists say the Final form of these characters are same with its Medial form, it is ok to us to follow the opinion.
> After I have reply from the two experts, let me send to all.
>
> Jirimutu
> >>>>>
