Re: Proposal to add Roman transliteration schemes to ISO 15924.
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 02:05:35 + Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote: > I'm still trying to work out what to do for IAST. Is it just: > > sa-t-m0-iast > > if one finds that > > sa-Latn > > allows too much latitude? For material that is a transcription rather than a transliteration, are there regional preferences for the homorganic nasals when writing in the writing systems generated by IAST? > How does one choose between anusvara and specific consonants > for homorganic nasals? Is it sa-150-t-m0-iast v. sa-IN-t-m0-iast? As these locales strictly speaking defined locales, I think I put the region in the wrong place. Perhaps they should be: sa-t-m0-sa-150-Deva-iast v. sa-t-m0-sa-IN-Deva-iast As a locale, is the latter the same as sa-t-m0-sa-IN-Mlym? I'm not sure how the preference for writing homorganic nasals varies by region and by script. What is the scope of IAST? Does sa-t-m0-sa-Thai exist? sa-Thai seems to prefer the nasal stops to anusvara before oral stops. The text in IAST that I encounter seems not to have ansuvara before stop consonants. I believe 'sa' would naturally expand (are there non-void prescribed rules on this?) as sa-Deva-IN, so perhaps the sa-Latn I usually see is unusual as sa-t-m0-iast and the description should be expanded to at least sa-t-m0-sa-150-iast if sa-Latn is not precise enough. Can someone advise? Richard.
Re: Proposal to add Roman transliteration schemes to ISO 15924.
I think the 'Latn' in sa-Latn-t-sa-m0-iast is unnecessary, though it partly depends on the range of the IAST transform. If the transformation can only convert to the Roman script then 'Latn' is superfluous; I'm not sure if the extension is formally enough to rule out Devanagari. On the other hand, some people seem to think that there is an IAST transformation to Cyrillic. However, as a locale for generated text, I feel it is inadequate. Wouldn't the expansion rules generate saṃti from संति rather than santi from सन्ति for 'they are'? Or have better fonts changed Indian practice? Richard.
Re: Proposal to add Roman transliteration schemes to ISO 15924.
On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:48 PM Richard Wordingham via Unicode < unicode@unicode.org> wrote: > On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 02:05:35 + > Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote: The text in IAST that I encounter seems not to have ansuvara before > stop consonants. That's typical. Whatever the source script (if there is one), IAST tends to be used by people who follow the sanskrit devanAgarI conventions pretty strictly (so ends up being transcription rather than transliteration.) > I believe 'sa' would naturally expand (are there > non-void prescribed rules on this?) as sa-Deva-IN, so perhaps the > sa-Latn I usually see is unusual as sa-t-m0-iast and the description > should be expanded to at least sa-t-m0-sa-150-iast if sa-Latn is not > precise enough. > Not sure what 150 is doing there.. -- -- Vishvas /विश्वासः
Re: Proposal to add Roman transliteration schemes to ISO 15924.
On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 5:07 PM Richard Wordingham via Unicode < unicode@unicode.org> wrote: > > However, as a locale for generated text, I feel it is inadequate. > Wouldn't the expansion rules generate saṃti from संति rather than santi > from सन्ति for 'they are'? True. I suppose that someone wanting to replicate the "anusvAra instead of nasal" shorthand in IAST would use a dravidian source script or a non-sanskrit source language - or ask for inclusion of a modifier after "iast" - like t-sa-m0-iast-anusavrashorthand -- -- Vishvas /विश्वासः
Re: Proposal to add Roman transliteration schemes to ISO 15924.
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 17:35:14 +0530 विश्वासो वासुकिजः (Vishvas Vasuki) via Unicode wrote: > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:48 PM Richard Wordingham via Unicode < > unicode@unicode.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 02:05:35 + > > Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote: > The text in IAST that I encounter seems not to have ansuvara before > > stop consonants. > That's typical. > Whatever the source script (if there is one), IAST tends to be used by > people who follow the sanskrit devanAgarI conventions pretty strictly > (so ends up being transcription rather than transliteration.) > > I believe 'sa' would naturally expand (are there > > non-void prescribed rules on this?) as sa-Deva-IN, so perhaps the > > sa-Latn I usually see is unusual as sa-t-m0-iast and the description > > should be expanded to at least sa-t-m0-sa-150-iast if sa-Latn is not > > precise enough. > Not sure what 150 is doing there.. I read, but in an old book, that when Sanskrit was printed in Devanagari, clusters phonetically composed of nasal plus plosive were written using the nasal consonant, but in India were printed using anusvara. The Sanskrit version of the UN Declaration of Human Rights at Unicode (https://unicode.org/udhr/d/udhr_san.html) conforms to this pattern by using anusvara instead of clusters, but I don't know where the translation actually came from. Accordingly, I thought that to get clusters instead of anusvara before plosives, I should select Sanskrit as used in Europe, as opposed to Sanskrit as used in India. '150' is the region code for Europe. Richard.
