Re: Indication of non-syllabicity (WAS: Re: Celtica (WAS: Maggel))

MJR> (*)I think CXS needs a shorter way of representing non-syllabicity,
MJR> preferably one that doesn't tie up ^ and keep it unavailable for
MJR> indicating superscripts.  Perhaps a following ( ?   Since ) represents
MJR> the tie, its opposite number is available for other uses, and the ( is
MJR> visually suggestive of the IPA diacritic . . .

AJ> I have suggested using '=', on the logic that there are no sound for
AJ> which we need indicate both syllabicity and non-syllabicity.

I strongly suggest we do NOT adopt that convention; it would lead to
confusion.  Sure, it *shouldn't*, but it would.  Some redundancy in
communication systems, including notation, is a good thing.

The same goes for '^'.  Yes, in the current use for non-syllabicity it
is preceded by '_', which would therefore make a bare '^' usable for
superscripts, but the potential for confusion is still there.  To
whatever extent possible I would like to avoid overloading any given
symbol with more than one meaning.  Some of that is certainly
unavoidable given the constraints of the character set, as evidenced by
the rampant reuse of letters as diacritics, but I'd rather not add to
the list if we can avoid it.

My preference is still for '('.  This is all just my opinion, of course.

Oh, and about the "Which Mark is this?" thread - in other fora where
there is more than one Mark I tend to go by "Marcos".  It is a nickname
bestowed upon me in high school due to the enthusiasm with which I took to
Spanish class, and it has stuck with me ever since; many friends whom I
did not meet until long after high school still call me Marcos in
person.

So, at the cost of some possible short-term confusion but in the goal of
avoiding confusion in the future, I shall begin to sign my messages thus
on here as well.  Sign me . . .

-Marcos