Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew transliteration

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Polycarp66 AT aol.com
  • To: 06PETERSON AT cua.edu, peterkirk AT qaya.org
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew transliteration
  • Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:53:01 EST

In a message dated 1/21/2004 8:00:00 AM Eastern Standard Time,
06PETERSON AT cua.edu writes:

>
> >If Semitists have got on
> >without such devices, it is only because they have not tried to
> >reproduce BDB with computer technology but have allowed their
> >publications to be less multi-script than they used to be.
>
> As I say, I'm pretty sure that Sokoloff did not use Unicode in producing
> his
>
> second dictionary. I might add that Peter Daniels has worked extensively on
> producing fonts, for the express purpose of publishing in multiple scripts.
> When he says that Unicode is not necessary for Semitists, he is speaking
> from
> a knowledge of what it takes to publish with computer fonts.
>

________

Is unicode necessary to the production of such texts? No. Is it a
preferable solution? Yes. The question is that of standards and of
scholarly
preference for the native script. The old SIL fonts used a different coding
from the
SP fonts which again was different from . . . ad inifinitum. With unicode it
doesn't matter whether you have the same font as the author. It is only
necessary that it cover the same language area. A unicode font which covers
polytonic Greek will properly produce a completely different unicode font
covering
the same area. Personally, I hate transcription. I refuse to use it. There
have even been occassions when I've used my unicode word processor to convert
transliterated text before I even attempted to read it.

gfsomsel




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page