Philippe, what you say about "no exception" is wrong, as you can see from the attachments.
Philippe> I was told long ago that the normative placement of kasra below the Philippe> letter was also requiring it to go below the shadda (above the letter) Philippe> when there was one, and this suffered no exception, at least in Philippe> Koranic texts: the shadda effectively modifies the consonnant, not the Philippe> vowel, and defines the new higher baseline of the consonnant cluster, Philippe> under which the kasra is simply position Philippe> So the case is similar here, going in the reverse direction for the Philippe> placement of hamza, relative to kasra that logically comes after the Philippe> hamza and that may be omitted if vowel precision is not needed. Philippe> Both exceptions are highly related to the logical order of binding for Philippe> those hamza and shadda diacritics. since hamza never is shaddad/geminated/doubled, I do not see what this means concretely. Philippe> The rule relative to the shadda is so strong that this is even one of Philippe> the very first thing you're taught in some didactic tutorials on how Philippe> to read Arabic. the rule is not valid for most orthographies of the Koran Arno
<<attachment: Maghribi_shadda_kasra_xvii23.jpg>>
<<attachment: XX47_Medina_Lybia.jpg>>
<<attachment: osman_hamzaKasratan.jpg>>
<<attachment: Maghribi_shadda_kasra_xli.jpg>>
