From: Chris Jacobs (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Mar 06 2003 - 12:02:26 EST
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dean Snyder" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Unicode List" <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: The display of *kholam* on PCs
[ ... ]
> Do you have an example of SIN with two dots? I have never seen it. This
> would make for ambiguous orthography, which, of course, does occur, but
> is usually, by design, avoided. But just to pull out one example, in the
> Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, BoSeM, "balsam", is written with the
> KHOLEM over the BET not the SIN - the SIN has one dot. And this pattern
> is repeated everywhere there.
BoSeM, is written with a SIN with two dots in
Ben Yehuda's Pocket English-Hebrew Hebrew-English dictionary.
It translates as perfume, spice there.
I see the spelling in Ben Tehuda's is inconsistent.
In the English-Hebrew section under perfume the dot is above the BETH, as you describe it.
But under spice there is again the SIN with two dots, like in the Hebrew-English section.
> >"shares the same dot" cannot only happen with SIN DOT, dot to the left,
> >but also with SHIN DOT, dot to the right.
> >I was thinking of the latter.
> >As in MoSHeL. If the SHIN DOT here is a KHOLEM then clearly the KHOLEM
> >belonging to the M is above the SH.
> Again, I have never seen this. In the same edition mentioned above we
> have MoSHeL, with two dots - the KHOLEM over the MEM (not the SHIN),
> followed by the SHIN dot over the SHIN.
In that same pocket dictionary MoSHeL, rule; resemblance, has no dot over the MEM.
It has one dot over the SHIN.
[ ... ]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 06 2003 - 12:47:29 EST