Re: Biblical Hebrew (Was: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels)

From: John Hudson (
Date: Fri Jun 27 2003 - 13:48:41 EDT

  • Next message: John Cowan: "Re: Yerushala(y)im - or Biblical Hebrew"

    Philippe said on June 27, 2003 at 10:25 AM

    >Do you then propose to create a specific character, for use within the
    >Hebrew script only, as a way to specify an alternate order for hebrew
    >cantillation? In that case, it would be more appropriate to define new
    >standard variants of these cantillation marks, and list them in the
    >supported variants, to be used specially for Biblic Hebrew.

    The cantillation marks are pretty much okay: they will not be re-ordered
    during normalisation. There are three that should ideally have a
    postpositional combining class (see, but the rest are fine.

    The problem is with the vowels.

    John Hudson

    Tiro Typeworks
    Vancouver, BC

    If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores,
    are labeled New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine,
    who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint
    Augustine and Stonehenge -- that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.
                                                                 - Umberto Eco

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 27 2003 - 14:29:32 EDT