Re: Tyl Sjok orthography
|From:||Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, June 10, 2003, 15:25|
On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 05:38:48PM +0200, Henrik Theiling wrote:
> Hmm, I don't think so, but: this helping dot will never be used when a
> palatal dot appears, so overlap is not a problem.
Yes, I wasn't thinking of overlap, but of a non-palatal being taken
for a palatal because it has a helping dot there.
> And the position of the palatal dot is slightly uneven compared to
> the rest of the glyph,which is detected very well by the eye.
Okay. I try to steer clear of distinctions that subtle, but humans
do seem to be awfully good at making them. :)
> However, I experimented with using the letter 'i' for the
> palatalisation, because some very common words (especially the
> pronouns 'jo', 'je' and 'ja') look very nice then. ('ji' is not a
> valid compination, so it's feasible).
Well, that would be logical, too.
> Have you had a look at my page that I posted? Do you like it?
I looked over it, but not yet in detail. So far it's impressive, though.
And I see what you mean about the glyphs looking like stick figures in
unlikely poses. :)