On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Jaap Pranger wrote:
> At 18:05 +0200 2000.08.23, James E. Agenbroad wrote:
> >In a list of Devanagari conjuncts if compiled a while ago there are at
> >least two cases of conjuncts in which both consonants have a nukta:
> >1. Ka + nukta + halant + ka + nukta = qqa
> >2. Ka + nukta + hanant + pha + nukta = qfa
That should say "A list of conjuncts I compiled a while ago" sorry.
> >I think:
> > 1. Any consonant can have a nukta. But if a Unicode character includes a
> >precomposed nukta, U+0929, 0931, 0934 and 0958 through 095F, and has a
> >another nukta, U+093C, following it, I'd ignore the second nukta during
> Mac typing behaviour (as far as I can see) is a bit different in that you
> can't type the precomposed nuqta characters with a single keystroke,
> and when you type a nuqta where you should not (e.g. as a second nuqta,
> or after a base character that shouldn't have a nuqta), the rendering
> translates your (faulty) typing into a clearly visible spacing character.
> (This spacing char is also a nuqta, but down below the baseline.)
> I think ignoring an erroneously typed char during rendering is not
> a good thing. Is rendering faulty data correctly not *as* bad as
> rendering correct data incorrectly?
You have a point. What to do? I guess two dots below in a
horizontal line would be better than two vertically. Perhaps some
distinctions need to be made here: 1. Between rendering text
dynamically as keyed where the syllable boundary is not always known, and
rendering a more or less fixed text where syllable boundaries can be
determined. ('more or less' here is meant to suggest a possible further
distinction between rendering for proofreading and correction and
rendering with no chance to alter the text.)
> >Whether a vowel or vowel sign can have a nukta I do not know. >
> Don't think so.
In another posting Mr. Leca says ISCII 91 uses nukta with both vowel
and vowel signs to input certain uncommon cases. So I guess it would be
safer to allow them, presumably before U+0901 to U+0903. It would help to
know if these are just input conventions or are also how long vocalic rii
and both vocalin li and lii are stored too.
> > 2. A nukta should immediately follow a consonant--before a halant or
> >vowel sign or 'various signs' = candrabindu, anusvara, visarga = U+901 to
> >U+903 only.
> > 3. These 'various signs' should follow a nukta, vowel sign (or
> >halant?). I'm unsure if one of these 'various signs' after a halant
> >would be valid; I doubt if 'various sign' followed by halant is.
> No 'various signs' after halant, and no 'various signs' followed by
> halant, I would say.
> 'Nuktated' consonants always (?) belong to Urdu words, and visarga
> "occurs almost exclusively in Sanskrit loanwords", thus the occurce
> of nuqta followed by visarga is highly unlikely, or non-existent.
> (I don't consider U+095C, U+095D and U+095F as nuktated; should I?)
Well, Unicode 3.0 page 403 does say they are identical to the base
character followed by nukta.
> > 6. [...........] a vowel sign immediately after a vowel is unlikely.
> Yess, there is a reason for U+0906, the <0905><093E> sequence for
> instance is invalid I guess.
Yes indeed. Mr. Leca points out that ISCII uses two halants to
mean an 'explicit halant'--one not to be replaced by a more complicated
conjunct. I guess I prefer the Unicode ZWJ.
> > 7. Unicode 3.0 fig. 9-3 (4) to the contrary notwithstanding, halant
> >immediately followed by a vowel sign or an independent vowel is highly
> >questionable--just consonant + vowel sign would seem preferable.
> I would like to know in which word(s) this 'rare' sequence occurs,
> in Sanskrit?
On page 554 (middle of second column) of Monier Williams
Sanskrit-English Dictonary there are three words beginning 'nirr.' where
'r.' is the vocalic ri. It displays as the independent ri vowel with a
reph above it; but they are filed after 'niru' and before 'nire' which
strongly suggests to me that the ra consonant + ri vowel sign are present
but display strangely. The first means to go out or fall away from; the
second to go asunder or pass away; the last to let out, deliver. The
first has several related words and citations. There may be others, I only
know of these; does anyone know if there is an automated version of
this work (like the OED) that one could search for all occurences of ra
(consonant) + ri (vowel sign)?
> Also, the explanatory text: "When an independent vowel appears ... ...
> ... ..., the indepent vowel should not be depicted as a dependent vowel
> sign, but as an independent vowel letterform", is a bit beyond me.
And me. I tried to get the fourth example changed but I failed
because I couldn't point to ISCII practice for this--it says nothing about
this. I take 'appears' to mean 'displays' or 'is desired to dispaly as'
and 'depicted' to mean is 'encoded'. My preference would be ra + ri vowel
sign, U+0930 and U+0943 with no halant and leave it for rendering
software to deal with. I was able to get ISCII treatment of Marathi
'eyelash ra' into 3.0.
> >All the above IMHO.
> the same for me,
If my suggested list of the expected order of certain Devanagari
codes has any utility would anyone like to restate it in light of the
comments on it?--preferably (to me at least) in a not too algebraic form.
Jim Agenbroad ( jage@LOC.gov )
The above are purely personal opinions, not necessarily the official
views of any government or any agency of any.
Phone: 202 707-9612; Fax: 202 707-0955; US mail: I.T.S. Dev.Gp.4, Library
of Congress, 101 Independence Ave. SE, Washington, D.C. 20540-9334 U.S.A.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:13 EDT