Re: Cyrillic guillemotleft and guillemotright

From: Hans Aberg (
Date: Fri May 13 2005 - 11:33:29 CDT

  • Next message: John H. Jenkins: "Re: Cyrillic guillemotleft and guillemotright"

    At 13:46 +1100 2005/05/13, Andrey V. Panov wrote:
    >In Russian (and other Cyrillic alphabets in former Soviet Union)
    >typographic tradition the double-angle quotation marks (guillemotleft and
    >guillemotright) usually have shape different from French ones: inner
    >angles have less size. Look at attachments. Now for Russian texts are
    >used special fonts (typically in CP1251 encoding) with similar glyphs
    >instead of ordinary guillemotleft and guillemotright. There is no way to place
    >the both variants in an unicode font.

    The thing is that Unicode usually include different glyphs if they
    have some linguistic differences to communicate. The example I use to
    give is the difference between plain and bold "sin": In English, the
    meaning does not change, but in math it does. Thus, in Unicode, there
    are different math styles ("Math Alphanumeric Symbols"), but none for

    Now, to the guillemots. Assume that <<...>> are the Cyrillic
    guillemots and that [[...]] are the French guillemots. If I write
    [[Russian text]], is the semantic meaning from that different from
    <<Russian text>>, assuming the quoted text is the same? The first
    case is probably part of a French text, quoting some Russian, and the
    second case, some Russian text quoting Russian.

    One can capture such differences, say by a computer language that is
    able to tell which script, or language, different parts of a text
    belongs to. In Unicode, one might add symbols for "begin" and "end"
    for indicating stacked environments plus characters for scripts. But
    I think that so far, one has decided against that, as far as Unicode
    is concerned.

       Hans Aberg

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 13 2005 - 11:34:37 CDT