From: N. Ganesan (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Apr 18 2006 - 19:13:43 CST
I am reading your writeup,
Therefore, when we introduce Visible Virama into the
codespace, Virama should be removed. Then it is
essential to adopt the subjoined model with signs/combining
forms of all consonants into the codespace. This is
essentially rejecting virama model and going for
subjoined model with Visible Virama.
This looks like a pretty drastic recommendation
for Malayalam Unicode compared to all other
Indic Unicode design. And, is the visible chandra-kala (virama)
so different compared to neighboring Tamil
or even Hindi section on half-forms in TUS?
How does one decide which meaning to assign
for candrakkala from, and another meaning for
conjunct form? Why not reverse the meanings
for virama and conjunct forms - it works both
ways for example in Tamil (k.ssa conjunct
A word like പന്ത്രണ്ട് 'pantraNT'
in Tamil will be 'pantiraNTu'
(if pattu '10' get modified for poetic
purposes as pantu (in grammar
it's called melittal vikaaram)
then pantiraNTu could mean
either as '12' or 'ball two'.
Isn't same in Malayalam?
will explain more soon.
will like views from Mahesh Pai,
linguist Chitrajakumar, and other
Malayalam experts also.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Apr 18 2006 - 19:16:37 CST