On 30/07/2003 09:39, Kent Karlsson wrote:
Peter Kirk wrote:
The two forms of vav with holam are also distinguished in the alpha
release of "The Unicode Leningrad Codex", available from
http://whi.wts.edu/WHI/Members/klowery/eL/index_html. The vowel form,
Ted's holam male, is encoded as holam followed by vav, and
the consonant
vav with holam is encoded simply as that. See for example the
distinction in the following copied from Genesis 4:13, where the two
forms are adjacent and clearly distinct in the printed BHS:
Note that combining characters alvays apply to the base character
*preceeding* it. Your example, divided into combining sequences:
05D2 05BC 05B8, 05D3 05B9 05A5, 05D5, 05DC, 0020,
05E2 05B2, 05D5 05B9, 05E0 05B4 0596, 05D9
gimel dagesh qamats, dalet holam merkha, vav, lamed, space
ayin hataf-patah, vav holam, nun hiriq tipeha, yod
In that example there is a vav-holam, and before that there is a dalet-holam.
/kent k
Understood. But that is really what we have in the text. In the second
word we have consonant vav with vowel holam. In the first word we really
do have consonant dalet with vowel holam, and then a silent vav which
originated as a placeholder for a long vowel in an otherwise unvowelled
text. But the holam which really belongs with the dalet has become
shifted on to the right side of the silent vav as an orthographic
convention, just as it is shifted on to a following silent alef -
something which no one here seems to have questioned, or suggested to be
too complex to implement, although the algorithm is identical.
--
Peter Kirk
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://web.onetel.net.uk/~peterkirk/
