[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: VMs: Further investigatio of folio f1r
Gabriel Landini wrote:
> Don't forget, EVA was never intended to represent one
> > grapheme with one transcribed character, and it
> > doesn't. EVA /iin/ is a case in point.
> The <iin> example is not convincing (to me). Not very long ago, I posted
> several examples of words just ending in <n> and not being preceeded by <i>.
> Moreover, one of the signatures on the first page reads <ydaraishy>, so <i>
> must represent something on its own too.
I agree. The real question, though, is how often does
/iin/ represent a single grapheme, and how often does
it not? EVA erases this distinction. I'm sure it
occurs, but is that often enough to be of concern?
> The problem of defining the character set is not that straightforward as some
> have suggested before.
Exactly, and that's one of the reasons you created EVA
in the first place. However,
1) Does the distinction between /i/ /in/ and /iin/
happen often enough that we need to worry about it?
2) Are we ignoring distinctions like one between two
things EVA reads as /s/ when they are really two
distinct graphemes, as Glen thinks?
I don't think 1) is a problem, though I'm not sure. My
own opinion is that 2) isn't a problem, but I recognize
we can't be sure.
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying: