On Mon, 12 May 2014 21:54:32 +0200 Philippe Verdy <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2014-05-12 10:03 GMT+02:00 Richard Wordingham < > [email protected]>: > > > 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. I was writing in haste; the use of the length mark is not as regular as I thought it was. > Hmmm... The length mark itself is not a dependant vowel by itself, > it's a modifier that follows a vowel (dependant or not). It's counted as such in the Balinese script, and has become such in most Indic scripts, being the dependent vowel AA. > Indic abugidas on the opposite have not distinguished this > null-consonnant explicitly; but it still exists logically as an > unbreakable combination of that null-consonnant and the dependant > vowel. In mainland SE Asia the distinction is made. The independent vowel whose vowel is the implicit vowel has been reinterpreted as the consonant for a glottal stop, and is combined with the dependent vowels. Several scripts, e.g. Tibetan and Thai, have largely done away with the independent vowels. Richard. _______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list [email protected] http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
