Re: Hebrew Vav Holam

From: John Cowan (
Date: Fri Aug 01 2003 - 00:02:08 EDT

  • Next message: Jony Rosenne: "RE: Hebrew Vav Holam"

    Ted Hopp scripsit:

    > On Thursday, July 31, 2003 5:18 PM, John Cowan wrote:
    > > Is not U+FB35 HEBREW LETTER VAV WITH DAGESH a shuruq?
    > Only graphically. Different pronunciation, different names, different
    > functions grammatically. Old typewriters used to have only a single key for
    > the lower case letter 'l' and the digit '1'. (Change your font if you can't
    > see the difference.) Sometimes, Unicode is an old typewriter.

    Well, hardly. The 1 and l were squeezed onto the same key on the
    typewriter because there weren't enough keys, but in handwriting and
    book fonts they have always been different. Whereas AFAIK the geminated
    vav and the shuruq have always looked the same, like English consonantal
    "y" and vowel "y".

    John Cowan   <>
    "One time I called in to the central system and started working on a big
    thick 'sed' and 'awk' heavy duty data bashing script.  One of the geologists
    came by, looked over my shoulder and said 'Oh, that happens to me too.
    Try hanging up and phoning in again.'"  --Beverly Erlebacher

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 01 2003 - 00:41:38 EDT