Re: Alphabet comparison table for Latin/Greek/Cyrillic

On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 01:31:06AM +0200, Henrik Theiling wrote:
> Hi!
>
> To help select letters for an Latin/Greek/Cyrillic (LGC) based
> alphabet for a conlang, I made a table for comparison.  The goal is to
> include all LGC Unicode characters from LGC without diacritics, hooks,
> strokes, etc., i.e. only the basic forms, in a single table for easy
> comparison of the glyph forms in order to more easily pick a subset
> for the conlang.
>
> I thought you might find it helpful, so here it is:
>
> http://www.kunstsprachen.de/lgc.html
[...]

I think И and η should be listed on the same line. They are historically
related, and in written form may be confused for each other.

Uppercase Ь is a lookalike to lowercase English b. In some printed
forms, the two may be identical.

Ы probably should be considered a digraph than a single glyph proper,
since it is indistinguishable from Ь followed by I in languages that
still retain an independent Cyrillic I.

Also, the cursive (handwritten) forms for some Cyrillic letters are
markedly different from their printed forms, and have lots of potential
points of confusion:

- the cursive form of и looks like English lowercase u and Greek υ.

- cursive lowercase т in Cyrillic is visually identical to printed
  lowercase m in English (cursive Cyrillic м is differentiated by being
  a smaller version of М with sharp peaks). Cursive uppercase Т is
  slightly more distinctive (like a T with three legs).

- lowercase cursive Ш may be confused with lowercase English w and Greek
  ω.

- lowercase cursive п looks like English lowercase n.

- depending on style, cursive Д in Cyrillic can look like English
  lowercase g (as handwritten, not as printed) or English lowercase d or
  Greek δ.

- lowercase cursive г looks similar (but not identical) to English
  lowercase z.

I'm not sure if you want to consider cursive forms separately, since not
all fonts have different glyphs for cursive forms (italics). It might be
helpful to at least mention this potential source of confusion.


--T

Reply