Re: logos, symbols, and ligatures (RE: Encoding Personal Use Ideographs)

From: James Kass (
Date: Sun Nov 04 2007 - 14:21:15 CST

  • Next message: John H. Jenkins: "Re: logos, symbols, and ligatures (RE: Encoding Personal Use Ideographs)"

    Adam Twardoch wrote,

    > Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
    >> There is still a difference between typographic ligation, which is generally
    >> applied without considering the meaning and context (e.g., representing "fi"
    >> as a ligature no matter where it appears in the text)
    > In German, it is considered correct to only use ligatures within one
    > part of a compound word, but not across the parts. For example, in the
    > same text, you would use the "fl" ligature in the word "fliegen" (to
    > fly) and you would NOT use a ligature in the word "auflegen" (to put on,
    > to lay sth on sth), since it's "auf+legen".

    Yes, Adam is right, of course. It is the compound word boundaries
    which stop ligature formation in German, and not the syllable
    boundaries which I'd mentioned in an earlier post.

    Concerning "fi" ligature, imagine how a default automatic ligation
    of such a string would affect Turkish text (where there is a
    difference between dotted and un-dotted "i"). Or, how Latin
    based scripts which use various diacritics over (and under)
    the letter "i" would be affected if ligation was on by default.

    It probably isn't safe to apply ligature formation conventions
    of English or Finnish to other languages using the Latin script.

    And, getting back to German, it's my understanding that the
    ligature formation conventions are quite different even in the
    same language when the text is set in Fraktur. Indeed, ligature
    formation in Fraktur appears to be more of an art than an
    exact science.

    Best regards,

    James Kass

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Nov 04 2007 - 14:57:25 CST