Re: Apostrophe in transliteration (was: Modifiers from punctuation)

From: Andrew West (andrewcwest@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Aug 09 2010 - 09:42:06 CDT

Next message: Jukka K. Korpela: "Re: Apostrophe in transliteration (was: Modifiers from punctuation)"

Previous message: Karl Pentzlin: "Re: Apostrophe in transliteration (was: Modifiers from punctuation)"
In reply to: Otto Stolz: "Apostrophe in transliteration (was: Modifiers from punctuation)"
Next in thread: Janusz S. Bie�: "[OT]: a strange language name abbreviation (was: How to encode reversed section sign?)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

On 9 August 2010 15:18, Otto Stolz <Otto.Stolz@uni-konstanz.de> wrote:
>
>> We all know why is good to have U+02BC separated from U+2019,
>
> Which one is recommended, when transliterating, as the Latin equvalent
> of the Cyrillic letter Soft Sign (044C)?

I believe it is

U+02B9 MODIFIER LETTER PRIME

Andrew

Next message: Jukka K. Korpela: "Re: Apostrophe in transliteration (was: Modifiers from punctuation)"
Previous message: Karl Pentzlin: "Re: Apostrophe in transliteration (was: Modifiers from punctuation)"
In reply to: Otto Stolz: "Apostrophe in transliteration (was: Modifiers from punctuation)"
Next in thread: Janusz S. Bie�: "[OT]: a strange language name abbreviation (was: How to encode reversed section sign?)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Aug 09 2010 - 09:44:24 CDT