Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy

From: Leo Broukhis (
Date: Sun Jan 11 2009 - 23:34:30 CST

  • Next message: James Kass: "Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy"

    On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Curtis Clark
    <> wrote:

    >> Naturally, not in general (I wouldn't claim that any photo or any
    >> drawing of a dog is a precomposed glyph), but when an attempt is made
    >> to use a stylized picture in plain text but no evidence is given for
    >> any semantic difference from the corresponding word spelled out, what
    >> else is it if not a precomposed glyph for that word?
    > So is 犬 a precomposed glyph for いぬ?

    As a unified CJK glyph - no, because it is also present in another
    independent writing system. If you had chosen a kanji specific to
    Japanese, then - in absence of homonyms - it can be argued that a
    kanji character is the precomposed glyph for a word spelled out in
    kana that uniquely identifies that character.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jan 11 2009 - 23:37:14 CST