Peter Constable wrote:
In the better known Indic scripts, are there ever cases of conjuncts formed
with independent vowels and a following consonant?
I know this may sound weird. The idea would be a VC syllable like "al".
Things that are more familiar are to have CC conjuncts, which would have an
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/17/2001 06:05:15 AM Antoine Leca wrote:
Of course, in regular Nagari, one ought to encode A +
virama + La/0932 (+ virama if followed by a consonant or at end of the
word in Sanskrit), as this is the way it is written.
OOPS!
I am horrified. I beg everyone's
Ar 11:02 -0800 2001-01-17, scrobh [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Well, if a script had such behaviour, one possibility could be to propose a
combining CONSONANT SIGN L for what we would be choosing to think of as a
dependent form of the consonant.
We rejected such a model for Khmer and Myanmar in favour of
I would encourage people (for new proposals) to not mistake the phrase
"corresponds to " to be equivalent to "should be named _".
The former is a convenient way for someone who is uses a native script and
has extensively studied Unicode to explain a situation to someone who uses
Ar 13:50 -0800 2001-01-16, scrobh [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
In the better known Indic scripts, are there ever cases of conjuncts formed
with independent vowels and a following consonant?
Not in the better-known ones, except possibly in esoteric manuscripts. One
finds weird stacking behaviour in Tibetan
Michael Everson wrote:
Ar 13:50 -0800 2001-01-16, scrobh [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Now, suppose a VC conjunct were to occur, as described above; "al", for
example. Would it seem preferable to treat the vowel like a consonant, and
encode as
A + virama + L
or to treat the consonant, and
On 01/17/2001 06:05:15 AM Antoine Leca wrote:
Of course, in regular Nagari, one ought to encode A +
virama + La/0932 (+ virama if followed by a consonant or at end of the
word
in Sanskrit), as this is the way it is written.
This is actually done? I got the impression from reading chapter 9 in
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/17/2001 05:13:25 AM Michael Everson wrote:
A + Ldep
No such thing as Ldep in our model, so you'd have to rely on A + virama +
L.
Well, if a script had such behaviour, one possibility could be to propose a
combining CONSONANT
In Bengali Vowel_A can form a conjunct with letter_Ya (Ya taking its zophola form.)
It has been suggested that this should be encoded as Vowel_A ZWJ Ya
I believe that the series V ZWJ C is much more logical than V Virama C as the
semantics of virama are to suppress the vowel.
Abdul
On 01/17/2001 02:52:41 PM John Hudson wrote:
Are thes four consonants always joined in this way when following an
independent vowel? Or is this behaviour exceptional and limited to
borrowed
words, etc.?
My understanding is the latter. Thus, I don't think obligatory ligation
would work.
-
On 01/17/2001 03:10:22 PM "AbdulMalik" wrote:
In Bengali Vowel_A can form a conjunct with letter_Ya (Ya taking its
zophola
form.)
It has been suggested that this should be encoded as Vowel_A ZWJ Ya
I believe that the series V ZWJ C is much more logical than V Virama C as
the
semantics of
11 matches
Mail list logo
