Re: [Pali] Re: Learning Pali without unicodes
- Dear Stephen Hodge,
Thank you for your long and rather detailed reply. There are many
issues of technical nature for me to understand in your post,
however, you have helped to "push me over the edge and into the
swimming pool" where <<<the scholarly romanized version of Pali (and
Sanskrit) with the diacritics it uses.>>> is concerned.
So I am kind of screaming and splashing around a bit but I have
resloved to learn to swim. That goes for the unicodes too.
Meanwhile, I have just found and downloaded some useful "swimming
aids" amongst the files ie. <<<MP3 sound files - pronunciations of
600 Pali words, recorded by Ven. Mettavihari sound files>>>.
The sound files are appropriatley named in romanised version of Pali
(diacritics included) according to the Pali word they playback. This
makes possible listening, reading and repeatng aloud.
And once again, thanks.
--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen Hodge" <s.hodge@p...> wrote:
> Dear Sukhdev,
> You wrote:
> Those dreadful Unicodes have to be learnt too (dont relish THAT
> though). I prefer a natural human language. Just cant stand those
> unicodes. But this being an IT driven world I know one day I will
> learn them. But I hope to have mastered Devanagari by then, and
> Sinhalese too. Serve those unicodes right. They didnt even EXIST
> decades ago.
> You seem a bit confused about unicode, so perhaps some
> help. Unless you are talking about the numerical codes used as
> for unicode letters (if that's the problem, you just need a
> keyborad utility), what you seem to dislike is the scholarly
> version of Pali (and Sanskrit) with the diacritics it uses. This
> been in use for over 100 hundred years and has some advantages,
even if you
> find it "dreadful". As you know, both Pali and Sanskrit do not
> specific script -- they can be witten with any north Indian script
> Sinhalese) or other scripts derived from them such as Thai or
> Since the latin or roman script is the most wisely used and
> the world, it makes sense to publish material in latin script with
> necessary diacritics in order to reach the widest readership. Also
> pre-computer days, there was the problem of the availability of non-
> fonts and typsetting. But if you are uncomfortable with
> fair enough -- but you will still need to understand the latin
> diacritics to use any of the standard dictionaries you will need
> Unicode is something quite different. When personal computers
first came on
> the market, there was little need for anything beyond a basic
> of the latin letters plus a few letters with diacritics and accents
> main European languages (the ANSII encoding). As the use of
> computers spread around the world, there was a need for many other
> such as Japanese, Chinese, Korean, Hebrew, Arabic, Amharic,
Georgian and all
> the Indian languages etc etc to be encoded. At first, each of
> was encoded on an ad hoc basis by various people or groups -- but
> no standard method for each of these scripts. This meant (and
still to a
> certain extent) that you could only display text correctly using
> font as the original used or else the text was completely garbled
> lots of blank boxes.
> The purpose of unicode is to standardize the codes allocated to
> in every script currently used in the world, so that any suitable
> be used or substituted. So unicode, as its name suggests, is just
> encoding system for letters and symbols. So apart from the basic
> script and the extended latin character set which has all the
> body could ever want for any language, there is also unicode
> Hebrew, Devanagari, Bengali, Telegu, Oriya, Gurmukhi and all the
> Indian languages, as well as Chinese, Japanese, Korean etc etc.
> However, most fonts that are available do not include all of these
> languages, but tend to be specific for different areas of the
> are a few enormous fonts which DO include a very large range of the
> and characters that have standardized unicode addresses, the most
> being Arial Unicode by Microsoft. The Titus Bitstream Unicode set
> good for people wanting to use Indian languages. Both of these
> readily available but neither of them are complete unicode sets.
> I do not know anything in detail about the Gurmukhi script, but as
> Indian script, I suspect that you should be able to i) find a
> and input manager, and ii) type out all the Pali you want for your
> purposes in Gurmukhi -- you will just need to learn which diacritic
> correspond to which letter in Gurmukhi. The only problem would be
> there is probably no published Pali material in Gurmukhi to use,
> might just start a trend. I would also recommend that you do not
> conversion program -- yes, it will save you time but you will learn
> Pali words if you have to type it out yourself manually.
> Hope this clarifies the situation and you will learn to look upon
> your friend !
> Best wishes,
> Stephen Hodge
- Dear Sukhdev,
> So I am kind of screaming and splashing around a bit but I haveSounds like fun -- good luck ! Basically, the unicode question concerns
> resloved to learn to swim. That goes for the unicodes too.
computer standards rather that what one actually sees on the monitor screen.
As I said, one can generate unlimited fonts with appropriate diacritics with
no reference to unicode -- but they will just be idiosyncratic.
> Meanwhile, I have just found and downloaded some useful "swimmingExcellent ! I would imagine that you should find the actual pronunciations,
> aids" amongst the files ie. <<<MP3 sound files - pronunciations of
> 600 Pali words, recorded by Ven. Mettavihari sound files>>>.
if not the transcriptions, fairly easy to master if you speak some Punjabi