From: Marcin ‘Qrczak’ Kowalczyk (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Oct 15 2007 - 08:21:27 CDT
Dnia 15-10-2007, Pn o godzinie 04:45 +0200, Philippe Verdy pisze:
> I'm not sure however that you must call them "ligatures"
Quite possibly some other term would be better. I meant that there are
no distinguished base characters and combining marks, such that each
characters would contain exactly one base character, but there are
spacing characters which must be combined into other characters when
they appear next to each other.
Only the dot in a consonant could be considered a combining mark rather
than a spacing character, because it does not appear standalone. I'm not
sure whether it is worth some special formal treatment, given that
making the dot a combining mark is not enough to make the issue of
delimiting graphemes reducible to recognizing combining marks, and it
would not change the encoding of a given text by a iota.
If I'm using some Unicode terminology incorrectly, I'm open to being
> I'm not sure why this script would be more useful than a subset of IPA for
> noting Polish phonology in a way that remains easy to read by readers of
> standard Polish orthography
It was not intended to be seriously used in practice, even though the
linguistic principles it employs are serious. It's an attempt to recover
as etymological spelling of the modern Polish language as possible
without hurting learnability too much.
-- __("< Marcin Kowalczyk \__/ firstname.lastname@example.org ^^ http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Oct 15 2007 - 08:24:26 CDT