## Word space
-In order for Syllabics word images to be legible and easily read in text settings of any kind, the word space character must be much wider in comparison to the conventional Latin word space.<sup>1</sup>
+In order for Syllabics word images to be legible and easily read in text settings of any kind, the word space character must be much wider in comparison to the conventional Latin word space. \[1\]
This wider word space is required primarily due to the very wide stance of the Syllabics system, exacerbated by the frequency of large, open counter spaces that result in pockets of whitespace throughout paragraphs of text. The space glyph in the Syllabics text must be roughly as wide as the width of the largest counterspaces (commonly, characters such as ᐃᐊᑎᑕ), allowing for word images to be clearly distinguished from one another.
## Endnotes
-<sup>1</sup> Bill Jancewicz, Algonquian Syllabics expert, notes (in email correspondence with the author) that “Much more difficulty has been experienced however with the whitespace, in particular the word-space character, which is encoded in BJCree UNI at somewhat wider than an em. The Euphemia word space is much too narrow for legible reading of syllabics.”
+\[1\] Bill Jancewicz, Algonquian Syllabics expert, notes (in email correspondence with the author) that “Much more difficulty has been experienced however with the whitespace, in particular the word-space character, which is encoded in BJCree UNI at somewhat wider than an em. The Euphemia word space is much too narrow for legible reading of syllabics.”
The author owes much gratitude to ᓂᓚᐅᓛᖅ ᐊᒡᓘᒃᑲᖅ (Miriam Nilaulaaq Aglukkaq), ᑕᒪᓕᒃ (Janet Tamalik McGrath), ᐊᕐᓇᐅᔪᖅ ᐊᓗᑭ (Arnaoyok Alookee), ᕿ’ᖓᖅᑐᖅ ᐃᑦᑐᓗᒃ (Qi’ngaqtuq Kevin Eetoolook), ᐊᑏᒪ 𑪴ᓪᓚᕆ (Attima Hadlari), ᗮᘧᐣᙒᔆ ᗮᘦᐣᙆ (Francois (Guy) Prince), ᑓᐣᘆᔆ ᗷᒼᗫᐩᘧᐣᐪ (Dennis Cumberland), and Bill Jancewicz, who kindly shared their knowledge and discussed the concepts, local preferences and requirments, and best practices for Syllabics typography presented in this module with the author.
</figure>
<figcaption>The above example on line one shows incorrect Carrier Syllabics forms, as rendered in Google’s Noto Sans Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics. The second line shows the correct glyph shapes for these characters, rendered in November Syllabics.</figcaption>
-In addition to the preferences noted above, Dakelh users have a preference for the contemporary design of certain finals characters, particularly ᑋ ᔆ ᘁ ᙆ . Historically, these characters were rendered as serifed, Latin-script form characters, which intentionally appeared distinct from other Syllabics finals characters. Francois Prince and Dennis Cumberland confirmed with the author that the contemporary community prefers monolinear shapes for these characters, which they feel better harmonize with the total Syllabics orthography, and which remain legible in text settings.<sup>1</sup>
+In addition to the preferences noted above, Dakelh users have a preference for the contemporary design of certain finals characters, particularly ᑋ ᔆ ᘁ ᙆ . Historically, these characters were rendered as serifed, Latin-script form characters, which intentionally appeared distinct from other Syllabics finals characters. Francois Prince and Dennis Cumberland confirmed with the author that the contemporary community prefers monolinear shapes for these characters, which they feel better harmonize with the total Syllabics orthography, and which remain legible in text settings. \[1\]
## Vertical positioning of finals
## Representation of foreign consonants
-The sound “r” is not found in the Dakelh language, and is only featured in foreign loan words—primarily from French and English. This sound is rendered in the Dakelh Syllabics system by two separate marks. Morice initially indicated “r” with a cross mark ᕀ (U+1540), which was rendered proportionally as a final consonant character, and positioned similarly at the midline. In the contemporary Syllabics, two marks are used based on the context in which they occur. Latin lowercase “r” (U+0072) has been integrated into the modern system to mark “r” when the consonant is followed by a vowel. The cross mark ᕀ is used to mark all other instances of “r” in conjunction with other syllables (2). Although this contemporary method is common, some users continue the practice of using cross mark ᕀ exclusively to mark all instances of “r”, regardless of the context in which it occurs.<sup>2</sup>
+The sound “r” is not found in the Dakelh language, and is only featured in foreign loan words—primarily from French and English. This sound is rendered in the Dakelh Syllabics system by two separate marks. Morice initially indicated “r” with a cross mark ᕀ (U+1540), which was rendered proportionally as a final consonant character, and positioned similarly at the midline. In the contemporary Syllabics, two marks are used based on the context in which they occur. Latin lowercase “r” (U+0072) has been integrated into the modern system to mark “r” when the consonant is followed by a vowel. The cross mark ᕀ is used to mark all other instances of “r” in conjunction with other syllables (2). Although this contemporary method is common, some users continue the practice of using cross mark ᕀ exclusively to mark all instances of “r”, regardless of the context in which it occurs. \[2\]
<figure>
## Endnotes
-<sup>1</sup> In an email conversation on 21 April, 2021, Cumberland shared further that “… Morice used a couple of different printing presses as he upgraded [his equipment] … it is possible he made adjustments [to the orthography as he worked] … and he might of also made errors in some type sets [that he chose to work with] …”.
+\[1\] In an email conversation on 21 April, 2021, Cumberland shared further that “… Morice used a couple of different printing presses as he upgraded [his equipment] … it is possible he made adjustments [to the orthography as he worked] … and he might of also made errors in some type sets [that he chose to work with] …”.
Dennis Cumberland and Francois Prince; in email correspondence with the author discussing issues relating the Unicode proposal prepared to revise the Carrier representative glyphs in the Unified Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics code charts, Cumberland and Prince confirmed that all members of the Dakelh (Carrier) Nation preferred a unified construction for the finals characters in contemporary typefaces, as opposed to versions of some finals characters featuring a serif construction.
-<sup>2</sup> Dennis Cumberland; in a telephone interview with the author, Cumberland described many aspects pertaining to the history of the Dakelh (Carrier) Syllabics, including details on the equipment that Father Adrien-Gabriel Morice had available to print texts in the Syllabics.
+\[2\] Dennis Cumberland; in a telephone interview with the author, Cumberland described many aspects pertaining to the history of the Dakelh (Carrier) Syllabics, including details on the equipment that Father Adrien-Gabriel Morice had available to print texts in the Syllabics.
### Works sourced
The vertical positioning of finals is largely stylistic in many Syllabics orthographies; however, in the northern Dene Syllabics orthographies (North and South Slavey, and Chipewyan), this positioning is required for the correct pronunciation of the language. This requirement—although important to these orthographies and languages—creates issues in representation in the current UCAS repertoire in the Unicode Standard. This is because the finals characters required for northern Dene Syllabics are used by other Syllabics orthographies within UCAS, which require these same forms to be rendered at the topline position.
-The UCAS code charts use the topline position for all finals characters, and as a result, all commonly available typefaces (especially those at the system level, which are the most accessible to these communities) have finals marks rendered at the topline position. This results in many northern Dene Syllabics communities not being able to render their finals at the vertical positions they require in the typefaces to which they have access.<sup>1</sup>
+The UCAS code charts use the topline position for all finals characters, and as a result, all commonly available typefaces (especially those at the system level, which are the most accessible to these communities) have finals marks rendered at the topline position. This results in many northern Dene Syllabics communities not being able to render their finals at the vertical positions they require in the typefaces to which they have access. \[1\]
<figure>
## Endnotes:
-<sup>1</sup> Chris Harvey notes in his article _[Syllabic glyph variation](http://www.languagegeek.com/typography/syllabics/syllabic_variation.pdf ),_ “While final placement in most syllabics languages may be stylistically conventional, it would in no circumstances impede legibility. In northern Dene languages on the other hand, the location of the final indicates pronunciation.”
+\[1\] Chris Harvey notes in his article _[Syllabic glyph variation](http://www.languagegeek.com/typography/syllabics/syllabic_variation.pdf ),_ “While final placement in most syllabics languages may be stylistically conventional, it would in no circumstances impede legibility. In northern Dene languages on the other hand, the location of the final indicates pronunciation.”
## Endnotes
The Nunavut preferred form (ᖕ) is the default representative form for ng in the Unified Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics code chart, and it is also the most common variant of the form. Nunavik communities deal with this preference by implementing localized typefaces that have their preferred ng shape (ᖕ) in the code point position for this character (U+1595).
-While readers in Nunavik encounter the Nunavut ng form more frequently, due to it being the default in many system-level Syllabics typefaces, Nunavut readers occasionally also encounter this form in materials from Nunavik, and refer to it as ᐃᒡᒑᙳᐊᒃ *iggaannguak* (“little eye glasses”).<sup>1</sup>
+While readers in Nunavik encounter the Nunavut ng form more frequently, due to it being the default in many system-level Syllabics typefaces, Nunavut readers occasionally also encounter this form in materials from Nunavik, and refer to it as ᐃᒡᒑᙳᐊᒃ *iggaannguak* (“little eye glasses”). \[1\]
Both forms are mutually intelligible between either community, with the only difference being that texts set with the preferred “ng” form for Nunavik (ᖕ) have a graphic distinction that alerts the reader to the fact that it is notably a text from the Nunavik region.
## Endnotes
-<sup>1</sup> Janet Tamalik McGrath—an Inuktut language consultant familiar with the range of Inuktut dialects of Canada– notes (in email correspondence with the author) that “ICI Nunavut uses a combo of ᓐ + ᒡ (ᖕ) and Nunavik uses what we call iggaannguak (little eye glasses, i.e. two little circles) … For me, I just use the Nunavut ICI keyboard and when reading Nunavik material, I understand it fine and don’t think about style.”
+\[1\] Janet Tamalik McGrath—an Inuktut language consultant familiar with the range of Inuktut dialects of Canada– notes (in email correspondence with the author) that “ICI Nunavut uses a combo of ᓐ + ᒡ (ᖕ) and Nunavik uses what we call iggaannguak (little eye glasses, i.e. two little circles) … For me, I just use the Nunavut ICI keyboard and when reading Nunavik material, I understand it fine and don’t think about style.”
### Works sourced
projects / thirdparty / google / fonts.git / commitdiff
