Michael Everson wrote:
>
> Ar 13:50 -0800 2001-01-16, scríobh Peter_Constable@sil.org:
>
> >Now, suppose a VC conjunct were to occur, as described above; "al", for
> >example. Would it seem preferable to treat the vowel like a consonant, and
> >encode as
> >
> > A + virama + L
> >
> >or to treat the consonant, and encode as
> >
> > A + Ldep
>
> No such thing as Ldep in our model
I see two candidates:
- U+0962 (dependent vocalic l) and all its variations in the other scripts
- U+0D32 ("normal" la in Malayalam) which behaves very much like a dependent
vowel (like the ra "vattu" in Nagari)
The second is no special (it would be encoded as L anyway! so it returns to
the first case).
A "problem" with the first is that I was taught that A + Vdep (which A +
dependent lri really is) is used as a pedagogical way to teach the alphabet,
and should mean the same as the stand-alone form of Lri (and indeed some
earlier encodings of Nagari went this way; I am unsure if the telegraph still
does).
I do not know how extensive is this behaviour (and how it may compete with
Peter's proposal). Of course, in regular Nagari, one ought to encode A +
virama + La/0932 (+ virama if followed by a consonant or at end of the word
in Sanskrit), as this is the way it is written.
Antoine
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:18 EDT