From: Ahmad Gharbeia (gharbeia@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Jun 18 2005 - 05:07:05 CDT
Yes, all the cases described as justifications for the need for glyph
colouring within normal typesetting.
This is how subjects like grammar, morphology, orthography, gender
endings, plural types, etc. were taught to us as children.
Ahmad
>
> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:38:26 +0100
> From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk@qaya.org>
> Subject: Re: Arabic letters separated by markup
>
> Really? All of them? Are you sure? Is it not just possible that some of
> them might do so because they wish to give special emphasis to the lam
> or to the alif? After all, it is reasonably common practice in Latin
> script texts to colour or otherwise emphasise individual letters within
> a word, for example to point out a spelling error or irregularity, or to
> show a grammatical rule. Within cursive Arabic script this cannot be
> done by a font change, but in principle it can be done by a colour
> change. So, if I was writing a text about the Arabic language
> (describing the grammar, not the writing system), I might well want to
> emphasise the alifs in each of a set of words, for example to
> demonstrate the rule by which either alif, waw or yeh is used as the
> seat for hamza. And I would want this emphasis to be preserved even in
> words in which alif follows lam. Now I can't prove that there are books
> that do this, but I would be surprised if there are none.
>
> --
> Peter Kirk
> peter@qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk@qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 18 2005 - 05:09:25 CDT