From: Richard Wordingham (email@example.com)
Date: Sun Nov 20 2005 - 13:26:12 CST
Philippe Verdy wrote:
> If I understand your statement, removing the ZWNJ would only affect the
> spacing of monosyllabic words normally ended by ZWNJ. But then one must
> ask whever all words end with ZWNJ: Of course not!
> So suppose that in the statement above, all ending 'e' may create
> ligatures with the following consonnant, and we had to insert an extra
> ZWNJ to separate them in English, and we were not using spaces, we would
> normally write:
> With the IDN rule, dropping ZWNJ would render the following incorrectly,
> and possibly with different interpretation where two separate words would
> combine into one:
> (note the capitals/smalldifference here just to say where the words are
> delimited, and in this example one could see the word "these" followed by
> the plural word "mantics", if it exists).
> Changing ZWNJ into a hyphen would be:
> Am I wrong?
Slightly. Visible viramas (and therefore ZWNJ) also occur word-internally.
I'm not sure you'd want to hyphenate placenames. It would probably only be
palatable if all syllables not involved in inter-syllabic conjuncts were
separated by hyphens.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Nov 20 2005 - 13:29:51 CST