IPA-ish Tone Diacritics

[Julian Bradfield]

On 2025-06-07, Richard Wordingham via Unicode <unicode at corp.unicode.org> wrote:
> I've been trying to decipher the tone diacritics used in from jounralk
> page 157 onwards (page 10 onwards of
> https://kyoto-seas.org/pdf/7/2/070201.pdf).  After massively increasing
> the magnification of the PDF, I see that three of them (numbers 6
> 'high-rise', 7 'low-rise' and 8 'high fall') are simply side-by-side
> combinations of U+0300 COMBINING GRAVE ACCENT 'low', U+0301 COMBINING
> ACUTE ACCENT, U+0302 COMBINING CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT 'fall' and U+030C
> COMBINING CARON 'rise'.  Does this mean that they *are* encoded, but
> one 'simply' has to induce the renderer to choose to render them
> side-by-side rather than stacking them vertically?

TUS says (§3.6) says that by default combining marks above the base
stack vertically, but they may be side-by-side for a number of
reasons. So I guess "yes".

> I'm struggling with number 9 'low-fall', which sometimes resembles
> U+1AB0 COMBINING DOUBLED CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT, but may just be a
> pixellation effect for for side-by-side <U+0302, U+0300>.

I think it's obvious that it's circumflex and grave - in 6-9 the
notation is prefixing an acute to indicate a high register, and
suffixing a grave to indicate low, apart from:

> Number 4 'high-dip' could be U+0303 COMBINING TILDE.

Typographically, it clearly is a tilde. Probably on the grounds that
acute acute-hacek is too fiddly to typeset