Christopher John Fynn wrote:
Print e.g. oestrogen (where oe represents a single
sound), but, e.g., chloro-ethane (not chloroethane) to avoid
confusion.
Please don't try to apply these rules to chemical nomenclature - there are
already enough people who get the hyphens wrong, without
The same people consider Latin a dead language, suitable only for
study of ancient documents, which is clearly not the view taken
at the Vatican, which continues to produce new documents in that language.
In recent encyclicals, however, at least as published at www.vatican.va,
the æ and oe
One can get daily news in Latin, too: http://www.yle.fi/fbc/latini/
Correction: a weekly review.
One can get daily news in Latin, too: http://www.yle.fi/fbc/latini/
Complete with a very nice recitation in Latin!
http://www.yle.fi/fbc/latini/recitatio.html
John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kent Karlsson scripsit:
E.g., it is quite legitimate to render, e.g. LIGATURE FI as an f followed
by an i, no ligation, whereas that is not allowed for the ae
ligature/letter, nor for the oe ligature.
How do you know that? Either Caesar or Csar
No.
One cannot make such a black and white statement (correctly, at least). The
OED does use Csar, for example. While most people would consider it
slightly old-fashioned to use that form, it is done.
Mark
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IBM, MS 50-2/B11, 5600 Cottle Rd, SJ CA 95193
(408) 256-3148
John Cowan posted:
How do you know that? Either Caesar or Csar is good Latin.
Christopher John Fynn posted in response:
No.
Hart's Rules:
VOWEL-LIGATURES
The combinations and should each be printed as two letters in Latin and Greek
words, e.g. Aeneid, Aeschylus, Caesar, Oedipus, Phoenicia;
John Hudson wrote:
The same people consider Latin a dead language, suitable only
for study of ancient documents, which is clearly not the view taken at
the Vatican, which continues to produce new documents in that language.
In recent encyclicals, however, at least as published at
John Cowan schreef:
Digraphs and ligatures are both made by combining two glyphs. In a
digraph,
the glyphs remain separate but are placed close together. In a ligature,
the glyphs are fused into a single glyph.
Oh, in that case I must say I think the UnicodeData.txt file doesn't do a
very
Pim Blokland scripsit:
For instance, the Danish ae (U+00E6) is not designated a ligature,
It was in Unicode 1.0; I think politics were involved in that one.
In Latin use, ae is most certainly a ligature, and likewise in the
languages (including English) that have borrowed words involving it.
In
The names do NOT always provide correct descriptions of the
characters. This is especially true for digraph and ligature
(and in the case of U+00E6 too), as well as (e.g.) SCRIPT CAPITAL P,
which is neither script, nor capital (it's lowercase), though
it is a p... In addition, there are
For instance, the Danish ae (U+00E6) is not designated a ligature,
It was in Unicode 1.0; I think politics were involved in that one.
In Latin use, ae is most certainly a ligature, and likewise in the
languages (including English) that have borrowed words involving it.
In Danish use,
On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 04:26 AM, Pim Blokland wrote:
Oh, in that case I must say I think the UnicodeData.txt file doesn't
do a
very good job.
For instance, the Danish ae (U+00E6) is not designated a ligature, but
the
Dutch ij (U+0133) is, even though the a and e are clearly fused
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, John H. Jenkins wrote:
since different people speaking different languages
often have different perceptions of what a symbol is.
Reminds me of ISIRI 3342 that officially considered symbol and character
the same thing and used one word (namaad, Noon, Meem, Alef, Dal) for
Kent Karlsson schreef:
Typographically, it's a ligature either way.
You mean that both ae and ij should be called ligatures, although one is
fused and the other isn't?
OK, I can live with that. I'd rather the ij were called a digraph, though.
The ij is considered by some to be one letter in
Kent Karlsson scripsit:
E.g., it is quite legitimate to render, e.g. LIGATURE FI as an f followed
by an i, no ligation, whereas that is not allowed for the ae
ligature/letter, nor for the oe ligature.
How do you know that? Either Caesar or Cæsar is good Latin.
--
After fixing the Y2K bug
Pim Blokland scripsit:
The ij is considered by some to be one letter in Dutch, and when written
down, an i and a j together look very much like a written y with
diaeresis. (See fonts like Script MT.) So I can understand foreigners
getting confused and encoding it that way (as a y with
Michael Everson everson at evertype dot com wrote:
You mean that both ae and ij should be called ligatures, although one
is fused and the other isn't?
OK, I can live with that. I'd rather the ij were called a digraph,
though.
These terms are not normative. Get used to it.
The names
I've reformatted Pim Blokland's question as a Unicode FAQ.
Q: What do the terms turned, inverted, reversed, rotated,
inverse, digraph, and ligature used in the names of Unicode
characters mean?
A: These terms are basically typographical rather than Unicode-specific.
A turned character is one
19 matches
Mail list logo
