From: Michael Everson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Nov 28 2003 - 16:16:14 EST
At 11:34 -0800 2003-11-28, Peter Constable wrote:
>A similar issue to the nndda: starting on page 54 of the TDIL newsletter
>(http://tdil.mit.gov.in/ori-guru-telu.pdf) and continuing onto the next
>page, they list conjuncts that have BA or WA as the second element. I've
>shown those from the bottom of p. 54 in the attached image.
>The shape for the conjoined component is the same for both of these.
>They describe the first as involving BA, however, while all the others
>involve WA. The question, then, is how "MBA" should be encoded: as
><0B2E MA, 0B4D VIRAMA, 0B2C BA >, or as < 0B2E MA, 0B4D VIRAMA, 0B71
I think the TDIL chart is wrong.
Traditionally (as in Learn Oriya in 30 Days) subjoined BA is used in
this context although the reading rules say to pronounce it [w].
Examples from this book:
k. + ba (wa) = kwa
j. + ba (va) = jva
dh. + ba (wa) = dhwa
m. + ba = mba
r. + ba = rba
sh. + ba = shba
Now an original ligature of O and BA has been pressed into service as
a syllable initial WA for foreign words, and encoded at U+0B71, but I
do not think this should be used to form conjuncts in -[wa].
o + ba (wa) = wa (this is not an example in Learn Oriya in 30 Days)
The traditional BA should be used for that unless we have better
evidence than the TDIL newsletter that such should be the practice.
[mba] and an eventual [mwa] would be encoded MBA and the reading rule
would be learned.
So I don't think that ORIYA LETTER WA has a conjunct form identical
with ORIYA LETTER BA in the same way that DDA and TA do.
-- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 28 2003 - 16:54:25 EST