>>262
I had an obscenely long reply ready to post before Firefox crashed and I don't feel like rewriting it. So in short:
- Loglan's /h/ was a first-class consonant like Lojban's /x/. The <'> spelling for Lojban /h/ could have been chosen to warn that this isn't your father's /h/, at least in terms of phonotactics.
- {'} isn't necessarily [h]; it can also be pronounced [T], [l_0], or [W] among others - possibly more allophones than {r} even. These variations are rarely if ever used though.
- There were efforts to have a unified orthography for Lojban and Loglan. I don't know how much influence that had.