<p>The best way is to do the same thing they did in real life: test it! Record yourself spelling something out with these words, distort it and add some static, then see how well you can make out the words. (Or better yet, see how well <em>someone else</em> can make out the words.) See if any of the words sound too similar, or if you could shorten some of them without causing a problem (the NATO one has several one-syllable words).</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-05-15T17:37:31.233Z
2023-05-15T17:37:31.233Z
Draconis
<p>A NATO style phonetic alphabet needs three things:</p>
<ol>
<li>The words have to be clearly distinct from other words in the list.</li>
<li>The words should ideally be short with uncomplicated sounds.</li>
<li>The words should be unique enough that if you know the alphabet, you don't need to actually hear the entire word to know what it is when transmitted over a bad radio connection or in a noisy environment.</li>
</ol>
<p>Give you an example: let's say you have a patrol out in a city and they report having come under fire from a building, and for whatever reason they don't use grid coordinates but instead give you the street address. This is what you hear over a bad radio connection:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>&quot;...number fife niner tree lima <em>(static)</em> -dia papa <em>(static)</em> -erra <em>(static)</em> -arlie alpha <em>(static)</em> -ovem- <em>(static)</em> india.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If you know the alphabet, you wouldn't have much of an issue decoding that even having only received fragments of the words: they're reporting the building as 593 Lipscani. This works because none of the words share a sequence of the same syllables, or nearly the same syllables, in the same order.</p>
<p>So looking at your word list, you have &quot;OSAKA&quot; and ÖSAMČON. You have both words starting with two similar sounding syllables, and both are three syllables long. That can cause confusion over a bad connection.</p>
<p>Your word list should also keep it simple as possible for non-native speakers. The first phoneme is obviously the most important as it represents the required letter, but the rest should be as &quot;basic&quot; as possible, using sounds that are as common in multiple languages as possible to make it as easy to pronounce by as many different speakers as possible.</p>
<p>Going to the NATO alphabet, take &quot;whiskey&quot;. You need it to represent &quot;w&quot;, but the actual phoneme /w/ isn't present in many languages, thus you don't see that phoneme present in any of the other words. Someone speaking who doesn't have that phoneme in their language doesn't even have to worry about trying to pronounce it: if you hear &quot;viskee&quot; or &quot;hwiskee&quot; or &quot;isskay&quot; or something, it doesn't matter because you know what word they are trying to pronounce, thus what letter they are indicating.</p>
<p>And that works for all of the words. &quot;Quebec&quot; is often pronounced &quot;kwa-bek&quot; by English speakers, but is properly &quot;kay-bek&quot;. Doesn't matter, it's distinct enough from all the other words that the receiver knows that word it's supposed to be.</p>
<p><strong>ADDENDUM</strong></p>
<p>You should also consider if you expect people with assorted accents and/or dialects and/or other first languages to be using this alphabet. &quot;OSAKA&quot; and ÖSAMČON provide the example here again. The speaker and listener may not differentiate between those two initial vowels; their own language may pronounce them the same, or they may not have one or the other, or neither. So that's why you need the words representing them to be as different as possible. Consider, in the NATO alphabet, &quot;KILO&quot; and &quot;QUEBEC&quot;. If you pronounce the latter properly, both have the same initial consonant but there is absolutely no way to confuse the two words, and thus what letter they represent. Similarly, in my accent, the initial sounds in &quot;ALPHA&quot; and &quot;OSCAR&quot; aren't that different, but the words are so distinct there isn't a problem in determining if I mean &quot;A&quot; or &quot;O&quot;.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-05-23T20:05:39.990Z
2023-05-29T17:53:20.037Z
2023-05-29T17:53:20.037Z
Keith Morrison
<p>To extend on Keith Morrison answer:</p>
<p>Split up all the words per syllables and put them in a spreadsheet program. Sort alphabetically and manually go through to validate that there's not a repetitive sounding written patterns.</p>
<p>Then go over sounds in a similar manner.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-05-25T01:50:42.413Z
2023-05-25T03:04:23.853Z
2023-05-25T03:04:23.853Z
Artis Zel
<p>I thought my conlang would need a NATO-esque spelling alphabet. In my current sketch, they are words borrowed from Korean and few other languages. They are to serve as mere spelling alphabets, and not to have any meaning in my conlang. (And sorry for changing the phonology and orthography <em>again</em>)</p>
<div class="s-table-container">
<table class="s-table">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Spelling alphabet</th>
<th>IPA</th>
<th>Origin</th>
<th>Meaning</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><strong>A</strong>GAŠI</td>
<td>ɑ gɑ ɕi</td>
<td>Korean &quot;아가씨&quot;</td>
<td>madam</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>Ä</strong>GUGGA</td>
<td>æ guk kɑ</td>
<td>Korean &quot;애국가&quot;</td>
<td>anthem</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>C</strong>ÌNAMI</td>
<td>t͡sɯ nɑ mi</td>
<td>Japanese &quot;津波&quot;</td>
<td>tsunami</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>Č</strong>IČARÌM</td>
<td>t͡ɕi t͡ɕɑ ɾɯm</td>
<td>Korean &quot;치찰음&quot;</td>
<td>sibilant</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>E</strong>IGO</td>
<td>e i go</td>
<td>Japanese &quot;英語&quot;</td>
<td>English</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>È</strong>RINI</td>
<td>ə ɾi ni</td>
<td>Korean &quot;어린이&quot;</td>
<td>child</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>G</strong>IRÈGI</td>
<td>ki ɾə gi</td>
<td>Korean &quot;기러기&quot;</td>
<td>goose</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>I</strong>SUNŠIN</td>
<td>i sun ɕin</td>
<td>Korean &quot;이순신&quot;</td>
<td><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yi_Sun-sin" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Yi Sunsin</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>Ì</strong>MGÌGSÈN</td>
<td>ɯm gɯk sən</td>
<td>Korean &quot;음극선&quot;</td>
<td>electron beam</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>K</strong>ARSENTÈR</td>
<td>k͡xɑɻ sen təɻ</td>
<td>Korean &quot;카센터&quot;</td>
<td>garage</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>L</strong>ISSÌNÈR</td>
<td>lis sɯ nəɻ</td>
<td>English &quot;listener&quot;</td>
<td>-</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>M</strong>INARI</td>
<td>mi nɑ ɾi</td>
<td>Korean &quot;미나리&quot;</td>
<td>dropwort</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>N</strong>APOLI</td>
<td>nɑ po li</td>
<td>Italian &quot;Napoli&quot;</td>
<td>Naples</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>O</strong>SAKA</td>
<td>o sɑ k͡xɑ</td>
<td>Japanese &quot;大阪&quot;</td>
<td>Osaka</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>Ö</strong>SAMČON</td>
<td>ø sɑm t͡ɕon</td>
<td>Korean &quot;외삼촌&quot;</td>
<td>maternal uncle</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>P</strong>AULA</td>
<td>pɑ u lɑ</td>
<td>German &quot;Paula&quot;</td>
<td>Paula</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>R</strong>OMEO</td>
<td>ɻo me o</td>
<td>English &quot;Romeo&quot;</td>
<td>-</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>S</strong>AMAGÜ</td>
<td>sɑ mɑ gy</td>
<td>Korean &quot;사마귀&quot;</td>
<td>mantis</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>Š</strong>IGTAGPO</td>
<td>ɕik tɑk po</td>
<td>Korean &quot;식탁보&quot;</td>
<td>tablecloth</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>T</strong>EGAMI</td>
<td>te gɑ mi</td>
<td>Japanese &quot;手紙&quot;</td>
<td>letter</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>U</strong>RETAN</td>
<td>u ɾe tɑn</td>
<td>Korean &quot;우레탄&quot;</td>
<td>urethane</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong>Ü</strong>SSARAM</td>
<td>ys sɑ ɾɑm</td>
<td>Korean &quot;윗사람&quot;</td>
<td>elder / senior</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p>At first glance, this seems to work well, especially for the syllables are distinctive per alphabet. But how can I ensure this? Is there a caveat I've overlooked?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-07-10T17:44:48.700Z
I would have thought that, more or less by defintion, a "nato-esque spelling alphabet" would use words from the language it's being used to spell; those words would have meanings normally; and the semantically-nulled, spelling interpretation requires context.
Karl Knechtel
<conlang-creation>
How to ensure a NATO-esque spelling alphabet works?
# How to ensure a NATO-esque spelling alphabet works?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-05-15)

I thought my conlang would need a NATO-esque spelling alphabet. In my current sketch, they are words borrowed from Korean and few other languages. They are to serve as mere spelling alphabets, and not to have any meaning in my conlang. (And sorry for changing the phonology and orthography *again*)

| Spelling alphabet | IPA | Origin | Meaning |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| **A**GAŠI | ɑ gɑ ɕi | Korean "아가씨" | madam |
| **Ä**GUGGA | æ guk kɑ | Korean "애국가" | anthem |
| **C**ÌNAMI | t͡sɯ nɑ mi | Japanese "津波" | tsunami |
| **Č**IČARÌM | t͡ɕi t͡ɕɑ ɾɯm | Korean "치찰음" | sibilant |
| **E**IGO | e i go | Japanese "英語" | English |
| **È**RINI | ə ɾi ni | Korean "어린이" | child |
| **G**IRÈGI | ki ɾə gi | Korean "기러기" | goose |
| **I**SUNŠIN | i sun ɕin | Korean "이순신" | [Yi Sunsin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yi_Sun-sin) |
| **Ì**MGÌGSÈN | ɯm gɯk sən | Korean "음극선" | electron beam |
| **K**ARSENTÈR | k͡xɑɻ sen təɻ | Korean "카센터" | garage |
| **L**ISSÌNÈR | lis sɯ nəɻ | English "listener" | - |
| **M**INARI | mi nɑ ɾi | Korean "미나리" | dropwort |
| **N**APOLI | nɑ po li | Italian "Napoli" | Naples |
| **O**SAKA | o sɑ k͡xɑ | Japanese "大阪" | Osaka |
| **Ö**SAMČON | ø sɑm t͡ɕon | Korean "외삼촌" | maternal uncle |
| **P**AULA | pɑ u lɑ | German "Paula" | Paula |
| **R**OMEO | ɻo me o | English "Romeo" | - |
| **S**AMAGÜ | sɑ mɑ gy | Korean "사마귀" | mantis |
| **Š**IGTAGPO | ɕik tɑk po | Korean "식탁보" | tablecloth |
| **T**EGAMI | te gɑ mi | Japanese "手紙" | letter |
| **U**RETAN | u ɾe tɑn | Korean "우레탄" | urethane |
| **Ü**SSARAM | ys sɑ ɾɑm | Korean "윗사람" | elder / senior |

At first glance, this seems to work well, especially for the syllables are distinctive per alphabet. But how can I ensure this? Is there a caveat I've overlooked?

**Tags:** conlang-creation
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I would have thought that, more or less by defintion, a "nato-esque spelling alphabet" would use words from the language it's being used to spell; those words would have meanings normally; and the semantically-nulled, spelling interpretation requires context.  

---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2023-05-15. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

The best way is to do the same thing they did in real life: test it! Record yourself spelling something out with these words, distort it and add some static, then see how well you can make out the words. (Or better yet, see how well *someone else* can make out the words.) See if any of the words sound too similar, or if you could shorten some of them without causing a problem (the NATO one has several one-syllable words).


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2023-05-23. Score: 4

A NATO style phonetic alphabet needs three things:

1. The words have to be clearly distinct from other words in the list.
2. The words should ideally be short with uncomplicated sounds.
3. The words should be unique enough that if you know the alphabet, you don't need to actually hear the entire word to know what it is when transmitted over a bad radio connection or in a noisy environment.

Give you an example: let's say you have a patrol out in a city and they report having come under fire from a building, and for whatever reason they don't use grid coordinates but instead give you the street address. This is what you hear over a bad radio connection:

> "...number fife niner tree lima *(static)* -dia papa *(static)* -erra *(static)* -arlie alpha *(static)* -ovem- *(static)* india."

If you know the alphabet, you wouldn't have much of an issue decoding that even having only received fragments of the words: they're reporting the building as 593 Lipscani. This works because none of the words share a sequence of the same syllables, or nearly the same syllables, in the same order.

So looking at your word list, you have "OSAKA" and ÖSAMČON. You have both words starting with two similar sounding syllables, and both are three syllables long. That can cause confusion over a bad connection.

Your word list should also keep it simple as possible for non-native speakers. The first phoneme is obviously the most important as it represents the required letter, but the rest should be as "basic" as possible, using sounds that are as common in multiple languages as possible to make it as easy to pronounce by as many different speakers as possible.

Going to the NATO alphabet, take "whiskey". You need it to represent "w", but the actual phoneme /w/ isn't present in many languages, thus you don't see that phoneme present in any of the other words. Someone speaking who doesn't have that phoneme in their language doesn't even have to worry about trying to pronounce it: if you hear "viskee" or "hwiskee" or "isskay" or something, it doesn't matter because you know what word they are trying to pronounce, thus what letter they are indicating.

And that works for all of the words. "Quebec" is often pronounced "kwa-bek" by English speakers, but is properly "kay-bek". Doesn't matter, it's distinct enough from all the other words that the receiver knows that word it's supposed to be.

**ADDENDUM**

You should also consider if you expect people with assorted accents and/or dialects and/or other first languages to be using this alphabet. "OSAKA" and ÖSAMČON provide the example here again. The speaker and listener may not differentiate between those two initial vowels; their own language may pronounce them the same, or they may not have one or the other, or neither. So that's why you need the words representing them to be as different as possible. Consider, in the NATO alphabet, "KILO" and "QUEBEC". If you pronounce the latter properly, both have the same initial consonant but there is absolutely no way to confuse the two words, and thus what letter they represent. Similarly, in my accent, the initial sounds in "ALPHA" and "OSCAR" aren't that different, but the words are so distinct there isn't a problem in determining if I mean "A" or "O".


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2023-05-25. Score: 1

To extend on Keith Morrison answer:

Split up all the words per syllables and put them in a spreadsheet program. Sort alphabetically and manually go through to validate that there's not a repetitive sounding written patterns.

Then go over sounds in a similar manner.


---

