From: Tulasi (tulasird@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Jun 14 2010 - 21:53:05 CDT
Actually, if I do not see letters/symbols along with names, in some
cases I cannot recognize. I am not a typographer either.
So like
Edward -> Close, but not quite. Consider LATIN SMALL LETTER PHI (ɸ)
it would be great should you please post both name & letter/symbol
associated with the name.
Van -> Do you want to consider Y and Z as not Latin letters, because
they were borrowed from Greek
I din't think Latin speakers borrowed. From my memory hole they had
adopted from Greek. And since this adoption was the work of true Latin
speakers all ALL CAPS, i.e., A B C ... ... ... Z are known to be
"classic Latin script". Also see the email by Jonathan Rosenne.
If you read Edward's email he highlighted on chronology (of adoption
from different scripts).
Did true Latin speakers adopt LATIN SMALL LETTER PHI (ɸ) to Latin script?
Or was it done very recently after Unicode was created?
May I ask Van please,
can you post both names & symbols/letters that you referred in your email?
Also please show how how GREEK SMALL LETTER PHI looks like.
This will help me to understand!
Thanks,
Tulasi
From: vanisaac@boil.afraid.org
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:43:18 -0700
Subject: Re: Latin Script
To: Tulasi <tulasird@gmail.com>, Edward Cherlin <echerlin@gmail.com>
Cc: unicode@unicode.org, Mark Davis ☕ <mark@macchiato.com>, Otto Stolz
<Otto.Stolz@uni-konstanz.de>, vanisaac@boil.afraid.org, Jonathan
Rosenne <jr@qsm.co.il>
From: Tulasi <tulasird@gmail.com>
> Thanks for the input Edward!
> Yep, I shell explore time-chronology as well.
>
> Edward -> Close, but not quite. Consider LATIN SMALL LETTER PHI (ɸ).
Amazingly, I consider Latin Small Letter Phi to be a part of the Latin
script. Why?: in my typographic life, I would design it differently
from Greek small Letter Phi. The Greek phi needs to work with other
Greek letters. The Latin phi needs to work in phonetic notation, which
is Latin letters; it needs to have more contrast with Latin Small
Letter Q than the Greek phi, so it has an ascender. As a Classicist, a
Greek phi with an ascender interrupts the flow of text, unless in a
slant font, so it is designed quite differently from Latin Small
Letter Phi. It's just like Cyrillic Dze and Sha, which have been
borrowed from Latin and Coptic, are designed and act like Cyrillic
letters.
> Mark gave a new link of letter/symbol that has LATIN (thanks Mark!):
> Mark -> http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/list-unicodeset.jsp?a=[:script=Latn:]&g=age
>
> Now, how many letters/symbols in that link are like "LATIN SMALL
> LETTER PHI (ɸ)", i.e., not from Latin-script?
there's really no way to make any sort of distinction like that. Do
you want to consider Y and Z as not Latin letters, because they were
borrowed from Greek, not adapted from Etruscan? How about Þ and Wynn?
They are from Runic. Should U+019B, Latin Small Letter Lambda with
Stroke be considered not Latin, even though it is not found in any
other script? There are a number of these, and the only classification
that is not completely arbitrary is to consider them ALL to be part of
the Latin script, including Latin Small Letter Phi.
> Also, how do I find the list of letters/symbols that do not have LATIN
> in names but from Latin-script?
The Spacing Modfier Letters and Combining Diacritical Marks may also
need to be included for a really comprehensive list, and these are
contained in their own blocks, Phonetic Extensions, and Phonetic
Extensions Supplement. Then the question is whether you should include
Devanagari Om. What about Currency signs? Punctuation? Should it
simply be the union of Script=common and Script=Latin? Script=common
includes puntucation from all languages, so you end up with Dandas and
Arabic commas, is that right? The question really only makes sense if
it has context: for what purpose are you defining something as Latin
script?
> Tulasi
Van
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 14 2010 - 21:57:10 CDT