Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[gothic-l] Re: script/writing

Expand Messages
  • René Gerritsen
    ... Recently on Medtext Jim Marchand suggested that O (capital o) could be used for hv, since gothic - or rather: the transcription of gothic - doesn t use
    Message 1 of 4 , Dec 2, 1998
    • 0 Attachment
      At 22:53 2-12-98 +0900, you wrote:
      >well, one more thing...
      >
      >what about writing gothic in ascii?
      >i would prefer to use
      >Þþ
      >instead of th
      >about hv for the character for "700", i would prefer some
      >one-character-solution. it may sound weird, but i think its better to
      >stay as close to the original as possible... i thought about using fx.
      >y, as it is not used otherwise, but this would be a far way from any
      >associated shape, although it would be one letter....
      >
      >if not all list members can see thorn and áéíóú, as mat asked, we might
      >have to use something else anyway....
      >
      >one more thing, would u think it a good idea to use the original gothic
      >alphabet (S-Type of Codex Arg.) on a webpage, or would u prefer ascii
      >(or both?). as im doing my page it would be great help to know what u
      >expect...
      >
      >tx
      >
      >eric
      >
      >


      Recently on Medtext Jim Marchand suggested that O (capital o) could be used
      for hv, since gothic - or rather: the transcription of gothic - doesn't use
      capitals, and O comes rather close to the manuscript shape of the letter.
      Some editors apparently use capital Y (capital to indicate that it's not an
      usual letter. (saiOan or saiYan; not great, but better than saiyan, I think).
      To write "th" instead of "þ" on the other hand wouldn't be a wise thing to
      do, since gothic does know -th- as -t-h- (at-haitan). The usual solution is
      writing þ (like: allaþro for allaþro); quite ugly, isn't it?
      Marchand suggests t% (allat%ro). Not pretty either, but at least much
      better. I'd say: try to use thorn.

      For a website I think ASCII is advisable; some examples in CA-type would be
      nice, but just for fun (scares people away instead of making gothic popular).

      cu

      René
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Free Web-based e-mail groups -- http://www.eGroups.com
    • David Salo
      ... Some older transcriptions (in German) used w for hw (or hv, if you prefer) and v for w; this is workable, if a bit confusing to those of us who
      Message 2 of 4 , Dec 2, 1998
      • 0 Attachment
        >about hv for the character for "700", i would prefer some
        >one-character-solution. it may sound weird, but i think its better to
        >stay as close to the original as possible... i thought about using fx.
        >y, as it is not used otherwise, but this would be a far way from any
        >associated shape, although it would be one letter....

        Some older transcriptions (in German) used "w" for hw (or hv, if you
        prefer) and "v" for w; this is workable, if a bit confusing to those of us
        who pronounce w in English fashion! The opposite ("v" = hw, "w" = w), as
        Edward suggested, is also fine. Other solutions (y, Y, O, etc.) seem very
        bizarre to the eye. However, since Gothic is not a terribly ambiguous
        language, I think that any and all solutions will be easily understood; I
        am not sure that, just for the purposes of communication, a single standard
        is absolutely necessary.

        >one more thing, would u think it a good idea to use the original gothic
        >alphabet (S-Type of Codex Arg.) on a webpage, or would u prefer ascii
        >(or both?). as im doing my page it would be great help to know what u
        >expect...

        I think a mix is a good idea. The Gothic alphabet is very attractive,
        and more accurate than any transcription, and should be used where
        possible; but of course it would not be immediately readable to most people.

        /\ WISTR LAG WIGS RAIHTS
        \/ WRAIQS NU IST <> David Salo
        <dsalo@...> <>


        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Free Web-based e-mail groups -- http://www.eGroups.com
      • Eric Craven
        ... well, my idea was that, if we agree now on some standard , it would be easier to exchange fx databases, because , well, it would be standard format... the
        Message 3 of 4 , Dec 2, 1998
        • 0 Attachment
          David Salo wrote:

          >
          > >about hv for the character for "700", i would prefer some
          > >one-character-solution. it may sound weird, but i think its better to
          > >stay as close to the original as possible... i thought about using
          > fx.
          > >y, as it is not used otherwise, but this would be a far way from any
          > >associated shape, although it would be one letter....
          >
          > Some older transcriptions (in German) used "w" for hw (or hv, if
          > you
          > prefer) and "v" for w; this is workable, if a bit confusing to those
          > of us
          > who pronounce w in English fashion! The opposite ("v" = hw, "w" = w),
          > as
          > Edward suggested, is also fine. Other solutions (y, Y, O, etc.) seem
          > very
          > bizarre to the eye. However, since Gothic is not a terribly ambiguous
          > language, I think that any and all solutions will be easily
          > understood; I
          > am not sure that, just for the purposes of communication, a single
          > standard
          > is absolutely necessary.

          well, my idea was that, if we agree now on some "standard", it would be
          easier to exchange fx databases, because , well, it would be standard
          format...
          the gothic1 font uses v for thorn and (in my modified version) y for hv,

          if we could agree one some standard, we could use the ascii text both as
          standard ascii and gothic1 text, which would be the best way i think
          (one thing, i can change the gothic1-ttf, so we can use all characters,
          except numbers and z, as the [shareware] program doesnt convert them) i
          use hexweb typograph (i think thats the name) for pfr`s (currently just
          netscape, but who wants M$ anyway ;-) [sorry, but...]

          >
          > >one more thing, would u think it a good idea to use the original
          > gothic
          > >alphabet (S-Type of Codex Arg.) on a webpage, or would u prefer ascii
          > >(or both?). as im doing my page it would be great help to know what u
          > >expect...
          >
          > I think a mix is a good idea. The Gothic alphabet is very
          > attractive,
          > and more accurate than any transcription, and should be used where
          > possible; but of course it would not be immediately readable to most
          > people.

          thank u thank u thank u, one person who likes my idea....
          well, if we could find some common ascii/gothic encoding, it would be no
          problem to let the user choose which he prefers, just some
          javascript.... but i dont want to write everything twice, just because
          we have different encodings...
          if anyone has any further suggestions, please

          tx
          eric

          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Free Web-based e-mail groups -- http://www.eGroups.com
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.