Kana (Hiragana/Katakana):
Two (essentially) iso-phonic(?) systems, where each symbol
in one set has a corresponding symbol in the other set,
both denoting the same sound value.
The set of forms are historically unrelated.
There is little overlap in the forms.
Competent readers will know both sets, but will lean
them separately.
Convention decides which set to use, but innovative uses
are known that flout these conventions. Use of Katakana
for foreign words is conventional.
Having longer texts (book length) available in both
forms, however, is very uncommon (never say "never").
The rules of layout are identical, spelling rules
differ in the demarkation of vowel length.
Widespread daily modern use
Monofont support is a practical everyday requirement
Encoded as two scripts
Latin (Fraktur/Roman/italic):
Three isophonic systems
Forms historically related
Some overlap in the forms
(Some forms of "Fraktur" have what I call 'embellished roman'
capitals, instead of true Fraktur shapes.)
Knowledge of roman/italic only is widespread, but reading Fraktur
can be self-taught.
Convention decides which one to use, when they occur together,
but innovative uses of Fraktur are common for names and titles,
and misuse of italics is rampant. Use of roman for foreign words
is a common feature of Fraktur texts. Use of italic for emphasis
is a common feature of roman texts.
Books published in Fraktur, have commonly been republished in
roman style, as Fraktur has fallen out of common use.
The rules of layout (ligating, hyphenating, etc.) are different.
In Fraktur, emphasis is denoted by s e p a r a t i n g the letters,
whereas in many languages w/o a Fraktur tradition, italics have
taken on this role, and character spacing is used to justify lines.
For languages with Fraktur tradition, separation is still used
with roman, and automatic use for character spacing is an example
of poor localization (!).
No longer widespread use. Limited to attention grabbing
(titles, names) and specialize (math) uses.
Monofont support is not an everyday requirement, except
in specialized notation (mathematics).
Encoded as one script plus extension for mathematics.
I think this is a complete summary. My belief is that if Fraktur was still
common today, and more commonly used together with roman, and/or if Japanese
usage rules for Kana were somewhat different, then the resulting encodings
might well have been different in each case.
From a purely rich-text point of view there is nothing that prevents treating
the Kana as a single script. On the other hand, the layout rule differences
make a simple font substitution awkward for Fraktur text of any length. So
does the use of length mark for vowels in Katakan, vs. vowel doubling in
Hiragana. No such issues exist for roman/italic.
A./
PS: The set of 'scripts' unified with Latin is in fact a bit larger, if
manuscript
and handwriting styles are considered as well. Some handwriting styles
(Suetterlin)
are so different that considerable training is required to read them.
PPS: I don't care to distinguish between 'conventions' and 'rules'. A tendency
of considering conventions as/in tersm of rules, is quite conventional in
Germany ;-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Jan 30 2002 - 00:56:51 EST