> Agreed with Yifán Wáng... But I wonder about the need for the character in > the first place. Are we going to add a full small-caps set, too, given its > use in morphological glosses? Isn't it enough to use a regular 'Q' in > plain-text, and style to small caps in rich text?
No, it's not in "morphological glosses" but phonological notations such as /yuQkuri/. In morphological discussions, phonological details are usually ignored and they just write down the surface forms. > I can see the rationale for mathematical bold, given that a regular-weight > plain-text character would stand for a different thing in mathematical > formulæ. But there's no way a capital Q would ever be confused as anything > other than the phoneme, in a Japanese phonological transcription. I don't think Q is, but it should be in unison with its fellows /ɴ/, /ʀ/, /ʜ/ etc. Some books make all of them capitals, but others all small capitals. Making into small capitals avoids possible confusions with variables like /C/ or /V/. 2016-12-26 5:03 GMT+09:00 Leonardo Boiko <[email protected]>: > Agreed with Yifán Wáng... But I wonder about the need for the character in > the first place. Are we going to add a full small-caps set, too, given its > use in morphological glosses? Isn't it enough to use a regular 'Q' in > plain-text, and style to small caps in rich text? > > I can see the rationale for mathematical bold, given that a regular-weight > plain-text character would stand for a different thing in mathematical > formulæ. But there's no way a capital Q would ever be confused as anything > other than the phoneme, in a Japanese phonological transcription. > > 2016/12/25 17:56 "Yifán Wáng" <[email protected]>: > > Please excuse my serial posting. > > I recently noticed the subhead given to the LATIN LETTER SMALL CAPITAL > Q in the following document (at A7AF) is "Letter for representation of > morpheme in Japanese". > http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16381-n4778r-pdam1-2-charts.pdf > > However, to my knowledge, the letter is required for describing a > "phoneme" of Japanese that isn't tied to specific "morphemes" (~ > "words"). I have contacted the original writer of the proposal: > http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2015/15241-small-cap-q.pdf > and he agrees with me in this regard. > > Thus I suppose "Letter for Japanese phonology" would be more desired a > heading for this character, though subheads are not normative. What > are your thoughts? > >
