Random memory
Sunday, 24 July 2005 15:30When I told my father about Esperanto, he thought it would be silly for a proposed International Auxiliary Language to require unusual diacritics, since that could only hinder its acceptance; using the straight Roman alphabet, with digraphs if necessary, would have made more sense to him.
(Interestingly enough, this was probably less of a problem back in the typewriter era, since you could put non-spacing diacritics such as circumflex accents over any letter you want… which is also, I believe, what accounts for the quaint single-vertical-line and double-vertical-line diacritics found in Marshallese: caused by overtyping an apostrophe or a quotation mark, respectively, over the vowel using a typewriter.)
no subject
Date: Sunday, 24 July 2005 13:42 (UTC)I think and have always thought so, too, and apparently lots of other people have as well. This is probably also the reason why Ido has digraphs and no diacritics.
I don't quite agree that digraphs are better but Esperanto could at least have used all letters of the Latin alphabet.
"Interestingly enough, this was probably less of a problem back in the typewriter era"
Zamenhof did foresee the problems with the diacritics, though. The Fundamento says:
"If it be found impraticable to print works with the diacritical signs (^,˘), the letter h may be substituted for the sign (^), and the sign (˘), may be altogether omitted."
no subject
Date: Sunday, 24 July 2005 17:29 (UTC)IMHO, an IAL should use neither diacritics nor digraphs, and indeed ought not use letters of highly-variable pronunciation, unless all those pronunciations are acceptable variants within the language. An IAL should, indeed, strive for universality.
no subject
Date: Sunday, 24 July 2005 19:46 (UTC)I suspected as much but wasn't sure.
IMHO, an IAL should use neither diacritics nor digraphs, and indeed ought not use letters of highly-variable pronunciation, unless all those pronunciations are acceptable variants within the language. An IAL should, indeed, strive for universality.
Sounds very sensible to me.
no subject
Date: Sunday, 24 July 2005 19:49 (UTC)"If it be found impraticable to print works with the diacritical signs (^,˘), the letter h may be substituted for the sign (^), and the sign (˘), may be altogether omitted."
That does lead to ambiguity (the classical example being flughaveno which is not fluĝaveno), though, which goes against one of the (assumed) goals of the language (viz. unambiguous sound-to-symbol and symbol-to-sound correspondences).
Incidentally, I wonder what would have happened if Esperanto had arisen nowadays; I think it would have had a much harder time to get its special letters into any computer character set. It's lucky to have official support in iso-8859-3 and, later, Unicode, presumably only because it had (a) been around for quite a while when computer character sets were drawn up and (b) was moderately important.
no subject
Date: Sunday, 24 July 2005 22:00 (UTC)This is the reason why I disagree with your father and with the creators of Ido on whether it's good for an IAL to have digraphs (unless of course they are unambiguous, for example, if one letter of the diagraph is never used on its own).
no subject
Date: Monday, 25 July 2005 04:10 (UTC)That's very cool. I like hearing about things like this. Another one is the n-umlaut found in the name of "Spinal Tap" - which actually is used in the Jacaltec Maya language.
And I suppose the Esperanto h-circumflex is pretty unique, too.
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 00:36 (UTC)no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 00:40 (UTC)no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 00:42 (UTC)no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 01:52 (UTC)The z-circumflex character that is used in some representations of Ubykh is also missing from Unicode despite the presence of its voiceless counterpart ŝ, which annoys me no end. Interestingly, I think ŝ might only be in there for Esperanto... I can't think of any other languages that use it.
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 02:13 (UTC)no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 03:16 (UTC)(; It's been suggested to me that I spelt the band with an ñ, which entirely misses the point...
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 04:11 (UTC)The eki.ee letter database (http://www.eki.ee/letter/) doesn't know of any other languages using it (http://www.eki.ee/letter/chardata.cgi?search=s+with+circumflex), either.
Z-circumflex isn't "missing", per se, though, since the Unicode philosophy is that you can combine any letter with any diacritical mark; the precomposed letters are there mostly for round-trip convertability with "legacy" character sets and I get the feeling that they're somehow not quite the "proper" way to do things.
But fonts and rendering systems generally do a better job for precomposed characters :p
ŵ
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 04:18 (UTC)I wonder whether this is Chichewa's ŵ that's mapped or Welsh's, though... my guess would be that this precomposed letter is in Unicode thanks to its use in Welsh (since it's spoken by western European people = important) and/or its presence in iso-8859-14 aka Latin-8 (http://czyborra.com/charsets/iso8859.html#ISO-8859-14), and that Chicheŵa was simply lucky.
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 05:08 (UTC)Yes, I agree... :P My beef isn't so much that there are characters "missing", but that the selection of which character+diacritic combinations are included and which aren't seems arbitrary (at best) or Eurocentric (at worst).
But fonts and rendering systems generally do a better job for precomposed characters :p
True... how true...
Re: ŵ
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 05:15 (UTC)Of course, that's probably because the sole piece of substantial Welsh I've ever seen is the name of Llanfair PG (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Llanfair_PG). :S
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 05:17 (UTC)True, true.
Re: ŵ
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 05:18 (UTC)It may be an optional marking; I have no idea how common circumflexed vowels are in common writing.
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 05:22 (UTC)You'll have to forgive the rather whimsical turn of mind that led me to this question... you wrote "an ñ" rather than "a ñ" - so how do you say "ñ"? As "n-tilde", or what? For me, it's like trying to work out what form of the definite article one would use in front of the letter ß.
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 05:31 (UTC)I'd probably say "n-tilde", though it's possible
For me, it's like trying to work out what form of the definite article one would use in front of the letter ß.
Eh? English only has one form of the definite article, at least in writing. Were you thinking of pronunciation ("thuh" vs "thee"), or of the indefinite article?
Then there's things such as "an FAQ" vs "a FAQ" (I prefer the latter, but many people use the former; it depends on whether it's "an eff-ay-queue" or "a fack").
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 05:32 (UTC)no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 09:43 (UTC)no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 22:01 (UTC)And, in English, it matters that 'es-tset' begins with a vowel, so it's "an ß" isn't it? I confess that my German is atrophied enough that I have no idea about letters' genders. (Unless you mean "beta", in which case "a beta", in English.)
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 22:04 (UTC)no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 22:05 (UTC)no subject
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 22:13 (UTC)And yes, it was es-tset I was referring to, not beta. I didn't know what its German name was, since my German is extremely poor. I can say "Guten Tag!" and "Doch!" and "Ich bin ein Berliner!" and not much else.
I am a Danish
Date: Tuesday, 26 July 2005 22:28 (UTC)And to sidetrack away from spelling from there, negative questions are fascinating, because of how they can be asked, and how they can be answered. Like, from anime, I've learned that Japanese answers "You didn't do that, did you?" with "yes", rather than "no". I wish I knew which languages do that.
no subject
Date: Wednesday, 27 July 2005 04:01 (UTC)I think all letter names are neuter (das A, das Zett, das Es-Zett, das scharfe S, das S, probably also "das Ö" but I'm so sure there for some reason).
Same in Greek TTBOMK: "to alpha, to vita, to o mikro, to o mega".