. Andy White wrote, > So to cut a long story short. Out of Wa and Va, Only Va correctly > belongs to the alphabet. Wa is a modern innovation
So is the Hmong script, yet the entire script is being proposed for inclusion. Best regards, James Kass . > Michael Everson wrote: > > > At 02:05 +0000 2003-02-12, Andy White wrote: > > >Thank you for the reply. > > > > > >Given this information, I wonder if anyone can tell me why > > the 'Bengali > > >letter AE' and 'Bengali Letter EA' were never included in > > the UCS? (I > > >am talking about the letters mentioned in the Unicode Indic FAQ, > > >http://www.unicode.org/faq/indic.html#13) > > > > Because these are not different letters of the alphabet. > > And 'Oriya letter Wa' is? What makes you think that? > > Oriya letter WA is not part of the alphabet. It is a modern innovation > used to replace the long lost Oriya letter VA (which *was* once part of > the alphabet and is now being reintroduced (sometimes confusingly with > the appearance of letter Wa ). > (If you are confused with the above statement I'm sorry but it's a long > story) > So to cut a long story short. Out of Wa and Va, Only Va correctly > belongs to the alphabet. Wa is a modern innovation > > I must add here that Bengali also has a combination used to transcribe > Wa. It is LETTER O + YYA_PHALAA. > > > The special > > form of subscript YA plus a vowel sign yields a particular > > pronunciation, but this is a reading rule. No different from the > > English digraph <ch> being pronounced as [t<esh>]. > > -- > > Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com > > > >
