From: Peter_Constable@sil.org
Date: Fri Apr 04 2003 - 18:21:33 EST
Kenneth Whistler <kenw@sybase.com> wrote on 04/04/2003 05:09:25 PM:
> > There is another convention, admittedly far less widespread: cedilla.
> I don't think this is an accepted convention.
No, not very widespread.
> I think those instances where you find a
> linguist publishing using vowels with cedilla for *nasalization*
> are results of either: a. confusion by the user regarding the
> direction of the hooks, or b. symbol substitution when using a
> font that had the cedilla forms but not the ogoneks.
Entirely possible. I have certainly seen cases of obvious symbol
substitution for various things.
> Using U+0328.
OK.
> Note that the example you posted also had an h-ogonek, so the
> usage is not limited to vowels, per se.
Indeed.
> (Although that particular
> entity itself is a little bizarre, since you cannot really
> nasalize a voiceless glottal fricative.
Then you'd be even more surprised at c-ogonek. (IJAL 65, p. 331.)
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 04 2003 - 19:03:09 EST