Re: Cyrillic -

From: John Cowan (
Date: Fri Sep 29 2000 - 21:08:52 EDT

On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Valeriy E. Ushakov wrote:

> I only thought about this possible misinterpretation of "letter titlo"
> after my letter was sent. "Letter titlo" is not a letter with
> (combining) titlo above. It's a special sort of titlo with a small
> letter underneath it and the whole thing acts like a combining mark.

Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification and information.

> > What is genuinely missing is IOTIFIED A. Because LITTLE YUS and
> > IOTIFIED A fell together in Russian as /ja/, Peter eliminated the
> > latter and adopted a modified form of LITTLE YUS, now CYRILLIC
> But aren't IOTIFIED A and YA just glyph variants (with LITTLE YUS
> lacking a parallel glyph in Peter's civil alphabet, merging with YA
> instead).

Historically YA is a glyph variant of LITTLE YUS, not of IOTIFIED A,
I am told. So given that we have already encoded YA and LITTLE YUS
(unavoidable, really, considering how different they look), IOTIFIED
A has no representation.

John Cowan                         
One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore
	--Douglas Hofstadter

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:14 EDT