c. CEDILLAS AND HOOKS:
Two cedillas and two hooks are required as diacritical marks for bibliographic transcription, and also for the proper representation of a number of languages (as documented in ANSI Z39.47-1985 and ISO 5426-1983).
These four diacritical marks are present in the USMARC character set, in ANSEL (ANSI Z39.47-1985) and in the ISO extension of the Latin alphabet for bibliographic use (ISO 5426-1983). Their encoding and naming in each of these character sets is shown in the following table.
USMARC ANSEL ISO USMARC NAME ANSEL NAME ISO NAME
(8-bit) (8-bit) (7-bit)
F0 15/0 5/0 cedilla cedilla cedilla
F8 15/8 5/1 right cedilla right cedilla rude
F7 15/7 5/2 left hook/tail left hook hook to left
F1 15/1 5/3 right hook right hook hook to right
or ogonek
According to http://www.niso.org/international/SC4/Wg1_240.pdf:
5/1 RUDE
ISO/TC46/SC4/WG1 N 240
The character rude ( right cedilla in MARC 21) is specious. Its only use (according to ANSEL and ISO 5426 although one may
draw on the other) is in the romanization of Thai (specifically, according to the ALA-LC Romanization Tables). Ms. Aliprand
discovered that this character only assumed its cedilla-like form in later versions of the ALA-LC romanization table for Thai. In the
first published version of this table, the mark was simply an arc, similar to U+031C, COMBINING LEFT HALF RING BELOW
(annotated IPA: open variety of vowel in the Unicode Standard). The choice of U+031C to represent the rude/right cedilla was
confirmed by a professor of Thai language.
5/2 HOOK TO LEFT
In ISO 5426, this character is annotated used in Latvian, Romanian. Because of this use, the most appropriate mapping is to U+0326
COMBINING COMMA BELOW (annotated as variant of the following [combining cedilla] in the Unicode Standard).
U+0322 COMBINING RETROFLEX HOOK is not mentioned at all in commentary or in the Unicode identifications.
So I continue to doubt that "combining retroflex hook" existed as an independant character before Unicode. The only information of usage for this character in the Unicode standard is "IPA: retroflexion". In fact this is not an IPA diacritic and never has been.
It may be that the IPA retroflex hook modification of dental/alveolar/postalveolar characters was included in Unicode because it was incorrectly identified with a right hook in some other standard and remained when the other hook was withdrawn from consideration.
Jim Allan
