On Mon, 12 May 2014 05:22:36 +0200 Philippe Verdy <[email protected]> wrote:
> My opinion is that unlike Consonants, the Vowel_Independent are > generally not needing an extra Dependant_Vowel to alter them (only > vowel modifiers for tone, stress, nasalisation, or newer > distinguished phonetic variants needed to represent words borrowed > from other languages...), and also generally don't need a Virama-like > character to remove their inherent vowel sign. These > Vowel_Independent also generally don't take the additional diacritics > used to modofy Consonants. Mostly it's only LETTER A that loses its vowel, and then generally when it comes to be interpreted as a 'Consonant_Placeholder' or as a 'Consonant'. Oddly, there are a few of these characters that are classed as 'Vowel_Independent' when 'Consonant' seems more appropriate. In most of the other cases, an independent vowel in combination with a virama still acts as a combination of consonant and dependent vowel. Dependent vowels on independent vowels generally modify rather than replace the vowel sound of the independent vowel. Balinese provides a simple example; the Brahmi length mark has retained or regained its independence and is regularly applied to both independent and dependent vowels. Richard. _______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list [email protected] http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
