Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Digraphic letters (was: Dutch "ij")

From:Ray Brown <ray.brown@...>
Date:Monday, July 22, 2002, 6:47
On Sunday, July 21, 2002, at 11:17 , Morgan Palaeo Associates wrote:

> Ray Brown wrote:
{snip}
>> are trying to say. I was under the impression you were insisting on >> the definition "one letter" = "one character", and that, e.g. {ch} >> must always be two letters. > > No. It's just that I get frustrated [and have done so long before I > knew about Conlang] when people state as an objective fact that > (e.g.) in Welsh 'dd' is a single letter, without acknowledging that > there is any ambiguity about that statement.
OK - so then if I use terms 'simple letters' & 'composite letters' in cases like Spanish & Welsh, I think that should resolve the ambiguity. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Sunday, July 21, 2002, at 05:57 , John Cowan wrote:
> Ray Brown scripsit: > >> And some letters with variant lower case forms. e.g. {a} and >> {g}, have at least three different characters. > > Might as well inject a little standard terminology here.
Thanks - always helpful to get standard terminology.
> The difference > between the two lower-case "a"s or "g"s is a distinction in *glyph*, > which means something like "abstract form", abstract because it is > independent of font.
Right .
> Thus Latin "A", Greek "Alpha", and Cyrillic "A" > share the same glyph; Latin "a" has two glyphs. Exceptionally, in the > IPA context, the two "a" glyphs are treated as different characters.
In layman's terms: two distinct letters & not variants of the same letter. Now, as I understand it, it's the ambiguities inherent in the word "letter" which concerns Adrian, so I may as well make an effort to get terminology right. Glyph is the abstract definition of shape. Character refers to a different usage? How would you define 'character'?
> A font is a collection of glyphs with the actual images associated > with them; modern fonts also contain a variety of devices to map > characters to glyphs.
OK.
>> In Turkish I guess it must, since undotted-i occurs as a separate >> letter - > > I think that Turkish views undotted-i and dotted-i as basically unrelated. > I know this is true of Swedish a-umlaut and a (but not so in German, > still less in French).
Tho I distinctly remember a photograph I saw in a book many years ago of Atatürk himself at a blackboard showing the new Roman script to a group of onlookers. On one left-hand column side were {undotted-i}, {o} and {u} and opposite on the right were {i}, {ö} and {ü}, so there seemed to be some sort of idea of back ~ front vowels there. But certainly the relationship is not as in German where, e.g. {o} and {ö} are not regarded, rightly so IMO, as separate letters but the latter is {o} with a trema showing i-umlaut modification. The {ä} of Swedish is certainly a different letter/character as indeed are the Turkish letters concerned. But I was commenting here on the term 'grapheme' which some people use. I am never quite certain what they regard as the 'smallest/basic unit of writing' is. I do recall somewhere an argument whether lower case {i} was one or two graphemes. Also in the "grapheme" terminolgy, the various form of the character {a}, including its upper case variant, are termed "allographs". It appears from what you say above, that we would say an 'allograph' is a variant of a grapheme with its own distinctive glyph. Or am I going wildly astray? I would greatly appreciate your definitions of these terms.
>> The letters of our the English version of the Roman alphabet are indeed >> all monographs. But what are we to make of, say, (a-e ligature)? > > It is a single letter in Danish and a ligature in English and Latin. > A ligature is a glyph which represents two or more consecutive characters.
That's exactly how I understand it. But if we can say that a-e ligature is a single letter in one language, but a ligature of two letters in another, then it seems to me that we can also say that, e.g. {ch} are two separate letters in English but a single composite letter in Welsh & Spanish. I would appreciate John's observations on the above. I shall be going nomail tomorrow for about three weeks, so I'll get this off quickly, hoping that I'll get John's reply before going nomail :) Ray.

Reply

John Cowan <jcowan@...>