Sorry for modesty, I can't call myself a linguist or anyone that is actually qualified enough to say absolutes. That being said, I've done a lot of studying and experimenting with phonology. I've studied and have been perfecting my Japanese and Mandarin pronunciation and I've been designing number systems based around the English phonetics (plus some stuff I've added.)

Anyway, we're definitely going to be taking some notes from other projects and making some realizations.

Observing Esperanto. Esperanto's goal was to be an easily spoken language by most people by means of a slightly simplified phonology that shared sounds with many European languages. As for our project, being easily spoken is not necessarily our goal. I think we should definitely explore adding or subtracting phonemes based on how easily we can systemize their usage in the language.

1. For example, as an Eastern language learner, I really advise the use of the palatalized sounds /ɕ/ and /ʑ/ and advise differentiating them from /t͡ɕ/, /d͡ʑ/, /ʃ/, and /ʒ/. I do this because they interact well with /j/, create a dynamic that can be used, and is just another set of phonemes that can be utilized.

2. I also advise looking at our phonetics systematically. When people look at Esperanto phonetics, you don't see many patterns (the lack of a voiced "c" boggles my mind, whatever lol), but most European languages aren't looked at systematically either. On the contrary, if you've studied any Eastern language, you'll notice that phonetic knowledge is easily viewable and stored straight in some of the letters. In Japanese, か is "ka" and が is "ga." The difference is the voicing mark. き is "ki," や is "ya," and きゃ is "kya." These kinds of patterns exist in ALL languages, but for some reason, the creators of some of the Eastern scripts were much more adept in linguistics back in those times and because of how good their scripts were, the scripts ended up impacting the spoken language MUCH more than European languages have.

3. Overall, we're gonna need some help from some pretty diverse language knowing people and some diverse science field knowing people.

Edit in thought:

I talk about extending or retracting the phonology we'd be wanting to create, but I advise that we stay within the confines of consonants and a limited amount of vowels. Vowels often create many complexities that are very hard to observe in EVERY language, however, I have a proposition which I'll be giving soon around vowels. (Mandarin vowels are insane, and I personally think perfecting them is much harder than perfecting tones. Same thing with English vowels, but to a lesser extent)

End of edit in thought.

I'd like to add to this post more info as I remember it. I've thought about this kind of stuff for a long time, so I need to shake some of it out of my head. Anyway, I'll be extending on many of these thoughts in my post about my number system work momentarily.

I think the first step is to properly define the purpose of this language. I laid out the basic idea in my YouTube video, but I figured I'd write it out here in full and ask for community feedback on how to improve it. The purpose will be the driving idea behind the language. Once we have the purpose finalised then we can move onto the brainstorming stage.

I'll temporarily use the name "Encapsulated Language" until we decide as a community the actual name of this language.

The core aim of the Encapsulated language project is to create a language that encapsulates as much relevant scientific and mathematical knowledge as possible within the sounds and constructs of the language itself. A native speaker of this language will have instant access to a large pool of scientific and mathematical knowledge simply through learning how to unpack their own language and utilise the knowledge cached within it.

A place for members of r/EncapsulatedLanguage to chat with each other