<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/24/2019 11:17 AM, Lieven L. Litaer
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:f43961b3-cb3c-c6d4-d40e-d94b4a85de08@gmx.de">Am
24.05.2019 um 16:58 schrieb SuStel:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">You gave two arguments against the left
single quotation mark U+2019:
<br>
it's aesthetically unpleasing, and Okrand doesn't use it.
<br>
<br>
Those arguments are also true about the apostrophe U+0027: no
<br>
typographer worth their salt would recommend its use for
aesthetic
<br>
reasons, and Okrand doesn't use it.
<br>
<br>
So while you SAY use of the apostrophe is fine, the reasons you
give for
<br>
not using the left single quotation mark also apply against the
apostrophe.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Then maybe my arguments were not complete and you have
overinterpreted
<br>
them.</blockquote>
<p>Right. That's it. I've "overinterpreted" you. This may officially
be the dumbest argument ever.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:f43961b3-cb3c-c6d4-d40e-d94b4a85de08@gmx.de"> Okrand has
definitely used the simple apostrophe. And now, to
<br>
remain very strict nitpicking: the apostrophe is named apostreophe
in
<br>
TKD, so this should lead to the situation that every kind of
symbol that
<br>
representes an apostrophe IS acceptable as an apostrophe.</blockquote>
<p>Okay, here's a job for you people with Okrand's email address.
Ask him this. Please don't elaborate or try to get him to phrase
the answer in any particular way. Just ask this:</p>
<p>"Does it matter which direction the line goes in the symbol we
use to represent the glottal stop in Klingon?"<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:f43961b3-cb3c-c6d4-d40e-d94b4a85de08@gmx.de"> The simple
'
<br>
apostrophe IS an apostrophe, so it actually even does not matter
whether
<br>
okrand has used it or not. Nevertheless, he HAS used it, so need
to
<br>
argue here.
<br>
<br>
Let's set it straight again for clarity:
<br>
<br>
Okrand has used the simple '
<br>
Okrand has used the curly ’
<br>
<br>
simple ' is defined as apostrophe
<br>
curly ’ is defined as apostrophe
<br>
<br>
left ‘ is NOT defined as apostrophe
<br>
left ‘ has NOT been used by Okrand
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>And that's all fine and dandy. Go forth and use ' or ’ in the
firm knowledge that you are mimicking the character choices used
by Okrand himself. Amen.</p>
<p><i>The Klingon glottal stop is not an apostrophe.</i> Okrand uses
a couple of different symbols to represent the glottal stop, one
of which Unicode calls an apostrophe, and one of which typesetters
call an apostrophe when there is no encoding associated with it.
He does not mandate which symbol is "correct," only that he uses
an effing typesetter's apostrophe in TKD. Physical typefaces are
not encodings.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:f43961b3-cb3c-c6d4-d40e-d94b4a85de08@gmx.de">
<blockquote type="cite">It's about the correct symbol to use to
represent the Klingon glottal
<br>
stop. And I maintain that it is not actually necessary to
exclude the
<br>
left single quotation mark from that role. I don't choose it for
myself,
<br>
but my preference is individual to me. I'm not proclaiming it to
be wrong.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
As you wish. It's my preference to write a zero for an O and.
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>You go right ahead. I'm sure that seems like exactly the same
issue to you.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:f43961b3-cb3c-c6d4-d40e-d94b4a85de08@gmx.de">
<blockquote type="cite">Okrand was NOT referencing the Unicode
standard when he wrote TKD.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Surely not, but he said that it's an apostrophe. left single quote
is
<br>
not an apostrophe. Why don't you want to accept that?
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>The apostrophe Okrand speaks of in TKD is what a typesetter with
a physical typeface recognizes as an apostrophe. It's defined by
its shape, not its Unicode encoding (which it doesn't have because
it's a physical piece of type). But Okrand is happy to use a
typewriter-style straight apostrophe in place of a
bend-to-the-left apostrophe when it's convenient for him to do so.
He changes the symbol he uses. The effing symbol he uses is not
that important.</p>
<p>If you were typesetting a book or other publication that you
wanted to look good, you would surely choose to use a right single
quotation mark or a typewriter-style apostrophe, because they look
good. But when you're not dealing with important typography, it
really doesn't matter which symbols you use.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:f43961b3-cb3c-c6d4-d40e-d94b4a85de08@gmx.de">
<blockquote type="cite">Your little character stunt in your email
shows how well we humans can
<br>
ignore encoding issues so long as the typeface is familiar. It
doesn't
<br>
matter whether you type an /l/ or a /ɭ,/ I can understand you
just fine.
<br>
Thank you for demonstrating my point for me.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
You're welcome. It was my intention that you may find it annoying,
but
<br>
obviously you don't. You probably just don't want to admit.
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>It look me a few moments to even notice it.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:f43961b3-cb3c-c6d4-d40e-d94b4a85de08@gmx.de">
<blockquote type="cite">I notice you used a hyphen-minus character
after your /Ah./ As a marker
<br>
of an interruption, the correct character to use, according to
most
<br>
style guides, is an em dash: —. I see you also used three
periods to
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Since when do you care about style guides?
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>I've always been quite interested in style guides and typography.
When Lawrence sent me a style guide for some translation work, I
told him I was pleased for having it; it answered a lot of the
questions I would have struggled with otherwise when working on a
translation for him. What type of quotation marks should I use? Do
I mark foreign-language terms? How? Which foreign terms get
transliterated? These are the sorts of things that style guides
are good for. They're not grammatical rules; they're the rules to
follow for a particular publication.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:f43961b3-cb3c-c6d4-d40e-d94b4a85de08@gmx.de">
<blockquote type="cite">indicate a pause. Why didn't you use the
Unicode ellipsis character, …?
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Because I was using the easiest accessable letters available from
my
<br>
keyboard. These include dots, minus-hyphens and also an
apostrophe. If I
<br>
decide to make a fancy apostrophe, I choose the one that is
defined as
<br>
apostrophe, hitting Alt+0146. I don't choose anything else that
just
<br>
looks like one only because I think it's nice.
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>Then why aren't you using Unicode Modifier Letter Apostrophe,
U+02BC, especially for Klingon? "Modifier letters in Unicode
generally are considered part of a word, this is preferred when
the apostrophe is considered as a letter in its own right, rather
than punctuation that separates letters." "Some consider, though,
that this character should be used for the apostrophe in English
instead of U+0027 or U+2019." (<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostrophe#Unicode">Wikipedia</a>)</p>
<p>It's because what Unicode gives you is a standard, not a mandate.
If some style guide told you to use U+2018 as an apostrophe, you'd
do it. Which symbols we use depends on how we want to use them.</p>
<p>Using U+2018 is not "wrong." It's just not standard. There is a
difference. And that's all that this stupid argument has been
about.<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>