From: Philippe Verdy (verdy_p@wanadoo.fr)
Date: Mon May 16 2005 - 16:17:14 CDT
From: "N. Ganesan" <naa.ganesan@gmail.com>
> On the other hand, Tamils devised puLLi orthographically
> to do a job - to "kill" inherent -a in the so called "consonants"
> in other Indic languages. Nakanishi rule (3) is invalid for Tamil!
> So, will write a small proposal to include data on puLLi in Tamil,
> its definition in ancient Tamil grammars and epigraphs,
> and its use in making Tamil script lot simpler and lucid
> in the info on Indic script characteristics in Devanagari section, Ch.
> 9 of the Unicode standard.
Tamil vowel signs do not necessarily kill the inherent [-â] of the
consonant, so the pulli "virama" will be necessary to kill it:
Is that what is meant in the Tamil example of page 5 ([kâ] + [-i] gives
[kây], not [ki]) ?
In this case, Tamil effectively is different.
Isn't it also true for Malalayam, the nearest script in the genetic tree?
What about gemination then (longer consonnants)? Does Tamil require a pulli
on each consonnant of the cluster?
For example when writing [haikkû], do you write:
- [hâ]+[-i] + pulli+[kâ]+pulli+[kâ]+[-û], or
- [hâ]+[-i] + pulli+[kâ]+[kâ]+[-û]?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 16 2005 - 17:37:03 CDT