Patrick Andries continued:
> The editor of the this linguistic lexicon has simply
> (manually ?) reversed the capital C to make it look like an
> antisigma, has put back to back a reversed capital C and a C
> to form the « sigmas adossés » and turned upside down a
> capital F for the « digamma inversum ». There are no special
> glyphs used otherwise (and besides I don't have a scanner at
> home).
>
> Nick Nicholas has answered very satisfactorily as far as the
> frequency of the antisigma and the probable ones of
> Claudius' inventions.
>
> If I understand properly, no current characters in the
> Unicode 3.0 could legitimately be annoted as being any of
> these three characters.
>
Given Nick Nicholas' explanation of the antisigma, it seems
correct that no currently encoded Unicode 3.0 character could
be considered to *be* that character. We would need a reversed
form of U+03F2 GREEK LUNATE SIGMA SYMBOL to have the version
appropriate to Greek text.
However, as a Latin adaptation, you should also consider that
there already *is* a reversed Latin capital C in the encoding:
U+2183 ROMAN NUMERAL REVERSED ONE HUNDRED.
Also, there already *is* a turned Latin capital F in the encoding:
U+2132 TURNED CAPITAL F. (Unless the digamma inversum is being
represented with an *inverted* capital F, instead of a *turned*
capital F.)
Both of these character *could* be used as approximations for the
Latin adaptation as you see it in the linguistic lexicon. They
would more or less accurately represent what the editor was
doing -- though would not be appropriate for the original form
of the text.
--Ken
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:01 EDT