From: Mark E. Shoulson (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Dec 04 2004 - 18:20:31 CST
John Hudson wrote:
> Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
>> Well, that's the difference under discussion. The "plain text" would
>> seem to be either the qere or the ketiv (but not the combined
>> "blended" form), since each of those is somewhat sensible.
> Is there some place in the standard where it says text must be sensible?
No, but I meant "sensible" in the sense of according with the usual
orthographic rules of the language. Stacking 97 different diacritical
accents on a single character, for example, would be an abuse of Latin
orthography and would not thus be "sensible." I would say that pointing
one text with the vowels of another, without regard for discrepencies in
character-count, constitutes an abuse of the Hebrew orthography, and
shouldn't be considered "normal" usage that must be supported.
That said, I have nothing against using NBSP and various other tricks
and winding up supporting this. Even the INVISIBLE LETTER might make
sense in some settings (e.g. where you have something to be drawn in
later but the diacritic is printed now, for some reason). Just that I
don't considere qere/ketiv per se a very convincing argument in a
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Dec 04 2004 - 18:29:58 CST