RE: [unicode] Unicode Standard for Oriya Ya-Phala

From: Peter Constable (
Date: Wed Mar 03 2010 - 08:31:39 CST

  • Next message: Shawn Steele: "RE: BIDI IRI Display (was spoofing and IRIs)"

    As noted, (y)ya occurs with both post-base and sub-base conjoined forms -- usually the post-base form, but at least with DA the sub-base form also occurs. (I don't think it helps to get into whether the two are pronounced the same or different, or what the historical derivations of each are; so, I use "(y)ya" to reflect the ambiguity we're trying to resolve.)

    As noted, Table 9-16 of TUS 5 shows 0B5F used to display the post-base form. This is consistent with p. 55 of the TDIL document. And as noted the TDIL document shows the subjoined form represented using 0B2F. I take that to be consistent with what is in Unicode, even though it doesn't state that explicitly. (Perhaps you'd like to propose additional text for the block description to make this clarification?)

    When I was working on the Kalinga font, I checked a number of sources including dictionaries and primers, and I also consulted with various Oriya experts. While it was clear that there was some confusion over the ambiguity, there was a definite consensus that the post-base ya-phalaa should be represented using 0B5F. But it was also necessary to support the sub-joined form as well; the TDIL document reflected the way to do that contrastively with the post-base form: use 0B5F for the post-base form, but 0B2F for the sub-base form.


    -----Original Message-----
    From: [] On Behalf Of
    Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 12:20 AM
    To: Vinodh Rajan
    Subject: Re: [unicode] Unicode Standard for Oriya Ya-Phala


    On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:26:46 +0530
    Vinodh Rajan <> wrote:
    >What is the recommended combination to produce the secondary-ya
    >conjunct in Oriya ?

    >Is it YA or YYA ?

    >Unicode Oriya fonts seems to have no standard in this regard.

    >What does Unicode standard dictate about this ?

    Your investigation is quite interesting. I think, Unicode standard specification does not answer to your question strictly.
    Unicode 5.2.0 p.288 Table 9-16, the second consonant is coded by "YYA" (U+0B5F). It seems that some experts recognized it as Unicode recommends to use YYA (U+0B5F):

    In another document:
    there is a long list of conjunct consonants from p.54-57.

    YYA (U+0B5F) is included in Table-2 (p.55), the list of "consonant signs". 4 examples are listed, YYA is always rendered as post-base form. Table-2 has no example for "YA".

      KA (U+0B15) + virama (U+0B4D) + YYA (U+0B5F)
      SSA (U+0B37) + virama (U+0B4D) + YYA (U+0B5F)
      KHA (U+0B16) + virama (U+0B4D) + YYA (U+0B5F)
      GA (U+0B17) + virama (U+0B4D) + YYA (U+0B5F)

    So, it looks like using YYA for conjunct consonant is popular.

    But, YA (U+0B2F) is included in Table-4 (p.57), the list of syllables that subjoined consonant is rendered in base- below form. 1 example (DYA) is listed.

      DA (U+0B26) + virama (U+0B4D) + YA (U+0B2F)
        -> DA + ya-phala (base-below form)

    Table-4 shows alternate presentation for of DYA, as

      ( DA + virama ) + YA (normal form)

    But it does not list "DA (normal form) + YYA (post-base form)".

    If all of these rules have same weight,
    the post-base form should be coded by YYA, and the below-base form should be coded by YA?

    According to Jeroen Hellingman's note in 12 years ago:
    it seems that this problem is not Oriya-specific. I have to study more about the history how they are introduced.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 03 2010 - 08:37:07 CST