Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
- On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 07:42:27PM -0700, Padraic Brown wrote:
> > From: H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@...>Yes, this ìs Ebisédian we're talking about. ;-) Now you know one of the
> >> > I rather like Ebisédian's convention of what amounts to
> >> > capitalizing the _end_ of sentences, an influence which I plan
> >> > to adopt in Tatari Faran, which is also big in the department of
> >> > marking the end rather than the beginning.
> >> Oo, now that I like! Are they big on the endings of things in
> >> general? i'ld hazard the guess that they don't also use the
> >> equivalent of an endstoP what with there being a differentiated
> >> letterform to do the joB
> > yeaHtheYhavEworDfinaLcapitalizatioNsOtheYneeDnOinterworD
> > spaceSoRendstoPsincEtheYhavEAprominenTenDoFSentencEmar*K*
> > anDyeaHtheYbreaKlineSliterallYanywherEeveNiNthEmiddlEoFAw
> > or*D*
> > Well, that's Ebisédian for ya. :-P
> Oh dearie me! That's mùch worse than I had at first feared! :P
reasons (albeit only a rather minor one) I shelved it.
> I hope you realise how disconcerting that is! The eye naturally wantsIt's camelCasing, subverted. Take that, Java! :-P :-P
> to read that as "Hthe Yhav Ewor Dfina Lcapitalizatio Ns Othe Ynee..."
> > Tatari Faran is a tad tamer, but they do have a penchant forI've still yet to find enough time to sit down and work out TF's writing
> > "end-marking". Postpositions, case clitics that terminate NPs,
> > adverbs that follow verbs, finalizers that terminate clauses,
> > y'know, the works.
> Interesting. Talarian is similarly end-oriented, but even so they like
> their fancy initial letters/syllable-signs/glyphs.
system in full. Thanks to some recent discussion here on the list, I
think I've got the general mechanisms nailed down, but a system without
any concrete glyphs is râther difficult to use, one might say. Be that
as it may, I've decided that due to the inherently vertical nature of
the writing, instead of diacritics there will be left-critics and
right-critics (dextrocritics and aristerocritics, if you're into
aristocratic names), much like leaves on either side of a tree trunk.
Since it's an abugida-type system, the main (trunk) glyphs represent
consonants, and are very horizontal: very wide, and rather low, thus
amenable to vertical stacking. Word-final glyphs will probably be marked
with some kind of decoration, perhaps a ligature of some sort.
Clause-final glyphs will have either a more elaborate form of the glyph,
or use a kind of dedicated end-of-sentence glyph (most likely merged
into a ligature with the last consonant). Vowels and syllabic codas
will be marked with dextro-/aristero-critics of various forms.
I imagine these glyphs carved onto stripped tree trunks or painted on
pillars or doorposts, probably a single line of large writing per trunk,
maybe a few lines down a wall. I haven't decided how longer texts or
more practical texts would be written; maybe for more practical writings
they'd use charcoal on stone tablets or wooden pads (they haven't
invented paper yet). The writing painted on walls and pillars would be
more elaborate, of course, a direct descendent of the pictographs from
which TF writing recently emerged. The hand-written stuff would be
greatly simplified, but retain the more elaborate pictographs as
convenient variants for word- and clause-endings.
> >> Poor dear!I prefer violas, they sound more melancholy. :-P
> > Yes I'm a poor ickle thing. :-P
> [cue violins]
> >> >> I also capitalise for emphasis.
> >> >
> >> > Really? I thought you usually áccented for èmphasis.
> >> The bloody Cheek. I can put Capitals if i bloody well Like to!
> > [...]
> > Wèll, Î shoǔld thínk sò!
> ℞íğĥţ! þàťş śòřţēď!
Whoa. Now rotate that 90° and stand it on its end, squash it a little
so the glyphs flatten out, and you'll get a rough idea of what Tatari
Faran writing might look like. :-P
There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.
- On 22 Jun 2013, at 19:29, BPJ <bpj@...> wrote:
>> Most IPA letters have capitals, actually.Let's look at the consonants first, shall we? I count 80 consonants used in the IPA (the current official IPA) and of those only 35 of them do not have capital letters. That's 45 with caps, against 35 without. A majority. And if you discount characters like the 8 glottals and 5 clicks which are not very Latin-like and are used *as* caseless characters (as opposed to lower-case characters without case), as well as 6 of the small-caps characters for which capital forms can't sensibly designed, you've got only 16 characters which could have caps not having them. Against 45.
> It's easy to determine that that is not true. Of the 96 characters in the IPA Extensions block only 29 have capitals, and even if we allow for the fact that some characters in that block are obsolete (some of which are among those having caps) or nonstandard, and that _a-z æ ø ð β θ_ and perhaps a few more letters with caps are also IPA that's far from a majority!
> Moreover there would be the problem that at least b/β ð/ɖ and x/χ would have identicalYou are mistaken as Latin letter Beta and Latin letter Chi have recently been added to the standard.
> capital shapes. That doesn't make a party IMHO!
To the consonants:
In the first line of the chart only two characters don't have capital forms, and one could compose a dotless J wth stroke. Admittedly the glottal situation is a bit tricky, but case forms were innovated for a natural orthography. Obviously it is problematic making a capital for a small capital letter.
Pp Bb Tt Dd Ʈʈ Ɖɖ Cc *ɟ Kk Ɡɡ Qq *ɢ Ɂɂ
In the second line of the chart two characters don't have capital forms; one could easily be devised for the first.
Mm Ɱɱ Nn Nn *ɳ Ɲɲ Ŋŋ *ɴ
In the fourth line one character has no capital; again, a small-cap.
*ʙ Rr Ʀʀ
In the fifth line two are missing caps, but both could have one devised pretty easily.
*ⱱ *ɾ Ɽɽ
In the sixth line the phi is missing a cap but could have one designed; the palatal s and z are but arguably one could compose the caps at need; small caps turned r could have a turned Yr as its cap; the pharyngeal is as problematic as the glottal. Latin Beta and Chi are new.
*ɸ Ꞵꞵ Ff Vv Θθ Ðð Ss Zz Ʃʃ Ʒʒ *ʂ *ʐ Çç Ʝʝ Xx Ɣɣ Ꭓꭓ *ʁ Ħħ *ʕ Hh Ɦɦ
In the seventh line both are missing caps, but all could have one devised pretty easily.
In the eighth line three are missing caps, but all could have one devised pretty easily.
Ʋʋ *ɹ *ɻ Jj *ɰ
In the ninth line three are missing caps, but two could have one devised pretty easily.
Ll *ɭ *ʎ *ʟ
It is true that none of the clicks are casing:
*ʘ *ǀ *ǃ *ǂ *ǁ
But most of the voiced implosives are, and the palatal could be devised from Ʃ:
Ɓɓ Ɗɗ *ʄ Ɠɠ *ʛ
Leaving us with the other symbols:
*ʍ Ww Ɥɥ *ʜ *ɕ *ʑ *ɺ *ɧ *ʢ *ʡ
Now, let's look at the vowels.
Ii Yy Ɨɨ Ʉʉ Ɯɯ Uu
[*]ɪ *ʏ Ʊʊ
Ee Øø *ɘ Ɵɵ *ɤ Oo
Ɛɛ Œœ Ɜɜ *ɞ Ʌʌ Ɔɔ
Aa *ɶ Ɑɑ Ɒɒ
Here casing fares even better, with 28 total vowels only 5 of which aren't cased, and 2 of those are excluded as they are small caps, except for small-capital i for which a proper capital has been devised and has been proposed for encoding.
I'd say "Most IPA letters have caps, actually" is accurate.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/