Re: Interlinears
| From: | taliesin the storyteller <taliesin-conlang@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, January 5, 2006, 13:04 |
|---|
* Paul Bennett said on 2006-01-05 02:28:28 +0100
> On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 20:02:09 -0500, Paul Bennett
> <paul-bennett@...> wrote:
>
> > <html>
> > <head></head>
> > <body>
> > This is a test of the display of <ruby><rbc><rb>Ruby</rb>
> > <rb>text</rb></rbc><rtc class="reading"><rt>Ruby1</rt>
> > <rt>Ruby2</rt></rtc></ruby>.
> > </body>
> > </html>
> >
> > Does anyone see any obvious defects in the Ruby markup?
>
> Well, I gave the W3C reference browser (Amaya) a try, and even *that*
> doesn't behave as expected. It's closer than either Opera or MSIE, though.
> MSIE gives simple ruby (without the <r?c> tags) a workable try, which is
> better than nothing, but I hate browser-specific pages even more than
> font-specific ones.
Ruby was never meant for interlinears. In Japanese ruby is at most only
two extra lines, one above, one below or one to the left, one to the
right, of kana words describing what the kanji characters they stand
next to mean or how they are pronounced.
For a good interlinear you need lines of pronunciation, morphology,
morph-translation at the least (in addition to the raw text) and
preferrably lines of free translation and parts of speech in addition.
> I think I'm going to give up HTML and look at Word macros, and maybe LaTeX.
Latex has the package gb4e (in the CTAN), for an example see
<http://taliesin.nvg.org/language/lingres-2.pdf>, especially example 4b,
page 11. But even gb4e is only designed for at most three lines plus
free translation. gb4e does break the interlinears for you though. I
know of nothing to make interlinears in word.
t.