Re: logos, symbols, and ligatures

From: John Hudson (
Date: Mon Nov 05 2007 - 16:30:14 CST

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: logos, symbols, and ligatures"

    >> Not really. The syllable boundary stops ONLY SOME ligature
    >> formations. It does not prevent for example the "ff" ligature,
    >> because the two letters are (almost) always occurring over a
    >> syllable break (except at end of a word). The "ff" ligature is an
    >> example where ligation occurs for aesthetical reasons. [...]

    So the 'rule' is that ligatures never form across syllable boundaries unless they (almost)
    always form across syllable boundaries.

    This all looks to me like a typographic style guide gone mad by trying to impose
    quasi-grammatical rules on what is ultimately an inherited aspect of writing: the
    convenient connection between certain letter strokes that obtain the benefit of avoiding
    collisions while maintaining rhythm in letterspacing.

    Has anyone actually tested the impact of these rules on readability in any empirical way?
    Is there any significant gain/loss in reading speed or comprehension between following
    these rules or applying ligation in the way it is apparently used without concern for
    every other language?

    John Hudson

    Tiro Typeworks
    Gulf Islands, BC
    A bilabial velaric ingressive stop is essentially a kiss.
    -- Pullum & Ladusaw, _Phonetic symbol guide_

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 05 2007 - 16:33:49 CST