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

Draft Proposal for Primary Character names Rev 5

Expand Messages
  • Mani M. Manivannan
    Friends, I have uploaded a proposal for the primary character names in the files section under tscii char name proposal-rev5.txt . OLD ASSUMPTIONS: 1. Char
    Message 1 of 70 , May 15, 2005
      Friends,

      I have uploaded a proposal for the primary character names in the
      files section under "tscii char name proposal-rev5.txt".

      OLD ASSUMPTIONS:

      1. Char names are transliterations
      2. IETF requires the char names to be identical to Unicode char names
      3. Only one char name should be given for each character/glyph

      RESULTS OF ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH

      1. Char names are not transliterations.

      Unicode char names for Tamil are not meant to be used as
      transliterations. They don't follow any recognized transliteration
      standard. They are all in a single case, do not use numbers or other
      signs and they cannot disambiguate between mey letters (consonants)
      and uyirmeys (consonant+vowels) if used as transliterations.

      2. Char names are names of characters that don't follow any
      transliteration

      This is obvious by looking at the unicode char names Aytham,
      Visarga, Virama, as well as the names for single and double
      quotation marks in the TSCII specifications. The character names
      also don't follow any transliteration standard. For instance, the
      name for the Aytham letter is spelled as "AYTHAM" and not "AAYTAM"
      as would be expected from adherence to Madras Tamil Lexicon or other
      transliteration standard. Instead it uses the common names for the
      letter.

      3. IETF does not require the char names to be identical to Unicode
      char names

      Though this is true by examining the registered char set names, it
      makes it easier for programmers familiar with the Unicode chart to
      see identical names in the TSCII.

      4. Two sets of char names have been given for each character/glyph

      This is obvious from the Sinhala Unicode standard

      5. This proposal does not need to challenge, amend, or reform any of
      the transliteration standards, conventions or proposals.


      RATIONALE FOR THE PROPOSAL:

      In several non-Latin character sets such as Greek, Hebrew, Arabic,
      Sinhala and Tamil, characters have names. No Greek language
      encoding standard would even consider using A, B, G, D, instead of
      Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, for the character names. Similarly, a
      Hebrew standard would be expected to use names like Alef, Bet,
      Gimel, Dalet and an Arab standard would use Alef, Beh, etc. The
      Sinhalese standards were careful to include the character names
      Ayanna, Aayanna, Aeyanna, etc. It is an oversight of the ISCII
      based standards to have missed the character names. Thus, the ISCII
      Tamil standard and the Unicode Tamil standard that derives from
      ISCII have neglected to include the Tamil character names.

      It is this oversight, this proposal wishes to correct.

      Several of these character names are used as is in the Tamil grammar
      books and other reference works dating from Before Common Era and up
      to 2003. Tolkappiyam (200 BCE - 200 AD) the ancient classic,
      Nannuul (13th Century CE) and until the 19th century the ultimate
      standard Tamil grammar, grammar books by Suddhanandha Bharathiyaar
      (1950), Dr. Paramasivam (1995), Singapore Siddharthan (2003), and
      general books on Tamil language and linguistics by Dr. Mu.
      Varatharasanaar, T. P. Meenatchisundaranaar, are among the several
      books that support the notation in this proposal.

      BRIEF ANNOTATIONS ON THE PROPOSAL:

      I have proposed the character names in consultation with noted Tamil
      scholars, Prof. George Hart, holder of Tamil Chair at University of
      California at Berkeley and Prof. Ilakkuvanar Maraimalai, Depart of
      Tamil, University of Madras, Tamil Nadu.

      Essentially, it follows the standard described by TolkAppiyam (200
      BCE - 200 CE) in adding -karam to the short vowels (kuRils) and -
      kaaram to the long vowels (nedils). The pure consonants are
      referred to us -kara mey as in "kakara mey" etc.

      I left the Grantha characters without any change except to note that
      they are uyirmeys or pure consonants. I couldn't find any reference
      where they are also modified with the -karam/-kaaram suffix.

      I have used common names for the characters such as Paththu rather
      than pattu that would be compatible with the MTL transliteration
      notation.

      I have left the retroflex N as NN without any modifier. However, to
      distinguish between the dental N (thannakaram) and the alveolar N
      (Rannakaram), I have used the linguistic terms dental and alveolar.
      I have tried not to use any transliteration notation to distinguish
      between these two Ns.

      I have included the Unicode Tamil character names as secondary names
      without any change except to use the latest notations such as Aytham.

      Please go over the proposal and send your feedback including typos
      etc. I have already discovered that I have spelled PATHTHU AS
      PATTHU. I am sure other notations need to be carefully proofed.

      Thank you for your consideration.

      anbudan,

      Mani M. Manivannan
    • naga_ganesan
      ... Puujyam was introduced in Tamil arithmetic by the British in 19th century. We ve discussed this extensively in wg02infitt, and its proposal to add Zero has
      Message 70 of 70 , May 16, 2005
        --- In tscii@yahoogroups.com, "Mani M. Manivannan"
        <mani_m_manivannan@y...> wrote:
        > Puujyam is a loan word and I understand that cuzhi is used in a
        > government standard. I will wait for comments from others about the
        > Tamil digit zero.
        >

        Puujyam was introduced in Tamil arithmetic by the British
        in 19th century. We've discussed this extensively in wg02infitt,
        and its proposal to add Zero has borne fruit in Unicode.

        I also feel since cuzhi is used as "knots" elsewhere,
        we don't have to use it for digit zero.

        I suggest Puucciyam, tamilized form of Puujya.

        N. Ganesan
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.