0027, 02BC, 2019, or a new character?

Philippe Verdy via Unicode unicode at unicode.org
Wed Jan 17 07:06:26 CST 2018

Excessive digrams based on (non-combining) apostrophes will create numerous
problems. The only case I know that uses an apostrophe in a polygram is the
trigram "c'h" used in Breton, where it is used to differentiate it from
"ch" (but here also it would have been simpler to use another digraph, such
as "sh", or a diacritic but Bretons wanted to use the diacritics available
in Frencdh which has no diacritic on consonants except "ç" with the cedilla
which could have been used there, and the tilde in "ñ"). The "c'h" trigram
in Breton however causes less problems because it is not final and within a
pair where it is unlikely to mark an elision between two words.

But now Kazakh will have difficulties to mark elisions, and will also have
problem to allow distinctive quotations I hope they will never have cases
like: 's'a'n'd'' with pairs of apostrophes at end and it would have been
better readable to see: 'ŝäñď'.

Using the caron diacritic, typical in Eastern European languages, would
have also done the trick over consonnants, while preserving the possibility
to capitalize letters: a single diacritic was easy to map on keyboards.
Adding the diaeresis or macron, or even the acute for the long vowels would
have also done the trick with the second diacritic.

But here Kazakh has some turkic origin and solutions based on other turkic
alphabets could have been used. But may be they did not like the compelxity
of Turkish for dotless vs. dotted "i". But a few diacritics could have
helped without having to use custom ligatures or digrams.

Now I think that these proposed non-combining apostrophes will evolve to
combining acute accents (the most widely used diacritic in Latin in most
languages): it will make the texts actually more readable.

2018-01-16 9:10 GMT+01:00 Shriramana Sharma via Unicode <unicode at unicode.org

> Rejecting the digraph method (which is probably the simplest) doesn't have
> much meaning because they have different sounds in different languages all
> the time like ch in English and German.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20180117/c9c5e9e9/attachment.html>

More information about the Unicode mailing list