From: Kenneth Whistler (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Feb 18 2004 - 16:07:23 EST
> >I agree. Furthermore, it seems to me that the laryngeal a, e, and o
> >subscripts are not productive, and that it would be better to encode
> >something named either LATIN LETTER CAPITAL H WITH SUBSCRIPT A or
> >(better, IMHO)
> >LATIN LETTER A-COLORED LARYNGEAL, and the same for the other two.
> No, the letters are productive in other contexts besides IE
> laryngeals. In particular at least the Uralicists have recently
> written to me thanking me for proposing the subscript o because it
> turns out they need it too.
And I pointed out that subscript-a is used as a transcription
for furtive patah in Hebrew. So there are sure to be more
such instances for a, e, and o, in particular.
It's the subscript-x and subscript-/ that I am objecting to.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 18 2004 - 16:43:22 EST