JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646
Title:
Doc. Type:
Source:Date:
Action:References:
Distribution:

Comments on N2626, Proposal on IPA Extensions & Combining
Diacritic Marks for ISO/IEC 10646 in BMP
Expert contributionPeter Constable, Microsoft
October 8, 2003
For consideration by JTC1/SC2/WG2, UTC
WG2/N2626 (=L2/03-317), N2307 (= L2/00-421), N2312 (= L2/01-025),
N2623 (= L2/03-326)
WG2 members, UTC members

Background
In document N2626, the Chinese National Body has proposed the addition of 320
characters for phonetic symbols. This repertoire is intended to complement the phonetic
symbols already in the UCS in order to provide complete coverage of symbols used bylinguists in China.
The proposed set of characters is quite mixed in terms of justification for encoding. Thereare characters that definitely should be added, though N2626 does not provide any
documentation demonstrating attestation and usage; there are characters that definitely
should not be encoded as the text elements already can be represented in the UCS; andthere are characters that are difficult to evaluate in the absence of further documentation
regarding intended usage.
This document will attempt to evaluate the different characters proposed in N2626.

Use of combining marks versus non-combining lettersor symbols
Many of the characters proposed are combining marks. Five of these are clearly nonspacing marks, as shown in Figure 1:1

Figure 1. Non-spacing mark: A95C

Many are clearly spacing marks, as shown in Figure 2:

1

In this document, I will cite characters from N2626 using the code positions in the range
U+A900..U+AA3F as used in N2626.

Comments on N2626 Page 1 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646

Figure 2. Non-spacing mark: A964

Some appear to be spacing marks, though in the absence of further documentation on
usage by Chinese linguists, it is not certain that their positioning relative to the basesymbol is not such that they might be considered non-spacing:

Figure 3. Combining mark, probably spacing: A945

It seems very unlikely that these should be considered non-spacing, and I will assume
that all of these are, in fact, spacing, with one exception, A940, which will be discussed
below.
There is an important issue that relates to the spacing marks, but not the non-spacing
marks. (The non-spacing marks will be discussed in the next section.) The proposed
spacing combining marks include the following:
A90A..A911, A913..A940, A942..A95B, A964..A96D, A978..A981, A98C..A9A9,
A9C8..A9E5
N2626 has proposed these characters as spacing combining marks, and has not discussed
the possibility that these might alternately be non-combining letters or symbols. There aremany reasons why most, and likely all, of these should be modifier letters rather thanspacing combining marks. Note the following observations:2•

Several of the proposed spacing marks are already encoded in the UCS as noncombining letters or symbols (details below).

•

The only spacing combining marks currently in the UCS are marks used in Indic
scripts for syllable-rhymes or other syllable modifications, and a small number
musical symbols.

•

N2626 itself is inconsistent in its handling of Chao tone letters, using combining
marks for right-stemmed tone letters but non-combining letters for the right- andleft-stemmed tone letter pairs used in indicated tone sandhi.2

See, however, footnote 13.

Comments on N2626 Page 2 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646
Table 1 lists many of the proposed spacing marks that appear to be already encoded in the
UCS as non-combining letters or symbols; this table shows the code position of the
proposed character along with what appears to be (in the absence of additional
information) an equivalent character in the UCS. This list does not include certain
symbols that will be discussed further below, or Chao tone letters, which are discussed ina separate section.
Proposed character

Existing UCS character

A90A
A90B
A90C
A90D
A90E
A90F
A910
A911
A918
A91A
A91C
A91D
A92C
A92D
A93C
A93D
A946
A949
A94A
A94D
A94E
A94F
A950

207F SUPERSCRIPT LATIN SMALL LETTER N
02E1 MODIFIER LETTER SMALL L
02B1 MODIFIER LETTER SMALL W
02B2 MODIFIER LETTER SMALL J
02E0 MODIFIER LETTER SMALL GAMMA
02E4 MODIFIER LETTER SMALL REVERSED GLOTTAL STOP
02B6 MODIFIER LETTER SMALL TURNED R
02B0 MODIFIER LETTER SMALL H
02ED MODIFIER LETTER UNASPIRATED
02DC SMALL TILDE
02C8 MODIFIER LETTER VERTICAL LINE
02CC MODIFIER LETTER LOW VERTICAL LINE
02BB MODIFIER LETTER TURNED COMMA
02BD MODIFIER LETTER REVERSED COMMA
02D3 MODIFIER LETTER CENTRED LEFT HALF RING
02D2 MODIFIER LETTER CENTRED RIGHT HALF RING
02C6 MODIFIER LETTER CIRCUMFLEX ACCENT
02D4 MODIFIER LETTER UP TACK
02D5 MODIFIER LETTER DOWN TACK
207A SUPERSCRIPT PLUS SIGN
02D6 MODIFIER LETTER PLUS SIGN
02E3 MODIFIER LETTER SMALL X
02DE MODIFIER LETTER RHOTIC HOOK

Table 1. Proposed spacing marks already encoded as non-combining letters or symbols

One proposed character that might be construed as a spacing mark requires special
discussion: A940 COMBINING LEFT ANGLE ABOVE RIGHT. This character is, infact, already encoded in the UCS as U+031A COMBINING LEFT ANGLE ABOVE.3
Hence, a new character for this symbol is not required.
The character A92F is very similar to U+003A COLON; treated as a non-combining
symbol, it is identical, at least in appearance. The authors of this proposal indicated in the
proposal summary form (C.10) that none of the proposed characters can be considered3

It is understandable that the authors might propose a new character in this case as the code charts forUnicode 3.0 and Unicode 4.0 use a representative glyph for this character that has incorrect positioning,with the mark directly above rather than above right. This issue was addressed in an erratum on the
Unicode Web site, at http://www.unicode.org/errata/index.html (date of erratum: 2003-5-23).

Comments on N2626 Page 3 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646
similar to an existing UCS character, but clearly that is not the case. There may be valid
grounds for proposing a distinct character (e.g. based on the effects of character
properties on text processes such as line breaking), but the proposal should, at least,
mention the similarity of A92F with U+003A, and provide at least some justification forencoding a distinct character.
Several of the spacing marks in this proposal come in pairs positioned on the right andleft of the base character and that are non-mirroring (the same outline is used on bothsides), as illustrated in Figure 4:

Figure 4. Non-mirroring left and right spacing mark pairs: A937, A93A”

If these are, indeed spacing marks, then if re-analyzed as non-combining symbols, theywould be indistinguishable, and so could be unified into a single character.4
Table 2 shows the pairs of non- mirroring left and right marks that, it appears (in theabsence of information indicating otherwise), could be unified if treated as noncombining letters or symbols. In most of these cases,5 it appears that the unified character
already exists in the UCS, and this is also shown in Table 2.
Non-reflective spacing markpair from N2626

Suggested equivalent non-combining character
in UCS

A913, A916
A914, A917
A930, A936
A937, A93A
A939, A93B
A942, A945
A931, A932

02C9 MODIFIER LETTER MACRON
02D7 MODIFIER LETTER MINUS SIGN
02D9 DOT ABOVE
02DA RING ABOVE
02F3 MODIFIER LETTER LOW RING
02C7 CARON

Table 2. Proposed non- mirroring left/right paired spacing marks to be unified as non-combining symbols

The characters A920..A928 may also include other such pairs, but I am unfamiliar with
their usage in Chinese linguistics, and it is unclear what the functions of these charactersare. Hence, these characters cannot be evaluated until further information is available,
including illustrations of their usage in actual documents.

4

The only grounds that might exist for treating these non-mirroring paired characters as combining marks
rather than non-combining letters or symbols would be if their position relative to the base symbol issuch that they would not be indistinguishable if treated as non-combining letters and symbols.
5
I would certainly contend that A931 and A932 should be unified with one another. Without further
information, it is difficult to know whether they could be represented by an existing UCS character, such
as U+002E FULL STOP.
Comments on N2626 Page 4 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646
Assuming that the analysis of A913 and A914 in Table 2 is correct, it then appears
acceptable to conclude that A915 is already represented in the UCS as U+02CD
MODIFIER LETTER LOW MACRON.
The proposal also includes some mirroring left/right pairs of spacing marks, as illustrated
in Figure 5:

Figure 5. Mirroring left and right spacing mark pairs: A955, A95B”

There are four of these pairs (eight characters in all): A954..A95B. Clearly, these cannot
be unified. They can, however, be treated as non-combining symbols. In fact, there is avery significant reason why it would be preferable not to treat these as combining marks:
to do so would result in re-ordering combining marks (they appear to the left of the basecharacter in left-to-right text), which would necessitate complex rendering processing tosupport these characters, as well as the usability issues associated with editing text thathas a visual sequencing different from the logical sequencing. These issues would notarise if the characters were not combining marks.
The need for these characters is demonstrated by attestations such as the following:6

Figure 6. Yin/yang tone modifiers (Baldwin 1871, p. 4)

Although this sample is not recent, these symbols are still in use by linguists that study
Chinese languages.7 Hence, I support the proposal to add these characters to the UCS,
though as non-combining symbols rather than as spacing combining marks. Also, thenames proposed for these characters reflects their geometric form, but there are names forthese symbols that are in reasonably wide usage. Thus, I suggest the following names forthese characters:
A954  MODIFIER LETTER CHINESE TONE YIN PING
6

Note that there is a typographic error in this text: the text is specifically intending to introduce all eightsymbols, but the sixth symbol is mistakenly typeset using the second symbol.
7
Lon Diehl, personal communication.
Comments on N2626 Page 5 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646
A955  MODIFIER LETTER CHINESE TONE YIN SHANG
A956  MODIFIER LETTER CHINESE TONE YIN QU
A957  MODIFIER LETTER CHINESE TONE YIN RU
A958  MODIFIER LETTER CHINESE TONE YANG PING
A959  MODIFIER LETTER CHINESE TONE YANG SHANG
A95A  MODIFIER LETTER CHINESE TONE YANG QU
A95B  MODIFIER LETTER CHINESE TONE YANG RU
The remaining spacing marks that I have not discussed are the following:
A919, A91B, A91E, A91F, A929..A92B, A92E, A932..A935, A938, A93E, A943,
A944, A947, A948, A94B, A94C, A951..A953.
These have no particular issues to mention, apart from the fact that the authors should
provide additional information regarding these characters, including function andillustrative samples—as should be done for all characters in the proposal. Attestation for
A91E, A91F and A931 (unified with A932—see above) is illustrated in Figure 7:8

Figure 7. Various modifiers: A91E, A91F, A931/A932 (Chao 1968, p. xxiii)

I do not have sources to illustrate attestation of the other characters at this time, however.

Proposed non-spacing combining marks
There are five non-spacing combining marks proposed in N2626:
A912, A941, A95C..A95E9
Without further information about usage by Chinese linguists, I can only speculate that
A912 is used to indicate labialization. The existing character U+032B COMBINING
INVERTED DOUBLE ARCH BELOW “◌̫” is used to indicate labialization, and as it has
a similar appearance, it could be suggested that these are glyph variants. I consider there
to be enough difference between these shapes to warrant a separate character. The
proposal should, however, discuss this issue and provide some justification for encoding
a distinct character.
8

In this sample, the author is indicating the position in which these symbols occur, to the left of the
beginning of a syllable. To achieve this visual presentation does not require or present a case for thesecharacters being treated as combining marks, however.
9
See also the discussion of A940 in the previous section.
Comments on N2626 Page 6 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646
There is a problem with the character A941, COMBINING DOUBLE INVERTEDBREVE BELOW in that the name does not match the representative glyph shown in thechart:

Figure 8. A941: “COMBINING DOUBLE INVERTED BREVE BELOW”

The glyph shown has the regular, upright orientation for breve, not the invertedorientation. This raises a question as to which was intended: inverted or non-inverted.
There is a known need for the latter, but I am not aware of any need for the former. Thus,
I assume that the glyph is correct and that the name should be COMBINING DOUBLEBREVE BELOW.
Given that correction, this character has been approved by UTC for addition to Unicode
at U+035C.10 This character is included in N2623.
The characters A95C..A95E are IPA-approved diacritics used as an alternate means toindicate contour tones. The need for these characters can be easily verified, as shown in
the following sample from the IPA Handbook (IPA 1999):

Figure 9. IPA-approved tone diacritics (IPA 1999, p. 184)”

It might be suggested by some, particularly given the descriptions shown in Figure 9, thatthese can be considered ligatures of the combining marks acute, grave and macron. Thatwould not be a good encoding model, however, as it would create a need to introduce
mechanisms to control whether combinations of these are displayed as ligatures or as
stacking diacritics, and given that such control mechanisms would likely involve ZEROWIDTH JOINER or ZERO WIDTH NON JOINER, there would be problems involved inusing these control characters with combining marks. As a result, I support the proposal
to add these three characters, as presented in N2626, to the UCS.
While these three tone diacritics are the only three cited in the IPA Handbook, there arethree additional tone diacritics of this sort that are also used by linguists: macron-grave “◌쎙 ”, acute-macron “◌쎷 ” and acute-grave-acute “◌쎹 ”. I am aware of the latter being used, but
10This is documented on the Unicode Web site at http://www.unicode.org/alloc/Pipeline.html.

Comments on N2626 Page 7 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646
do not have samples to verify this at this time. The following figures demonstrateattestation of the other two, however:

Figure 10. Non-IPA tone diacritics: acute-macron (Gilley 1992, p. 49)”

Figure 11. Non-IPA tone diacritics: macron-grave (Gilley 1992, p. 51)”

This raises an issue with regard to the names proposed for the tone diacritic characters in
N2626:A95C combining right dull angle above
A95D combining left dull angle above
A95E combining inverted tidle
The names “right dull angle” and “left dull angle” are insufficiently explicit toaccommodate the characters illustrated in Figure 10 and Figure 11 as well as those
proposed in N2626. Also, the suggested name for A95E is inappropriate as the characteris not an inverted tilde: the angular shape is distinct from that of tilde. Thus, I suggest thefollowing names for the tone diacritics proposed in N2626, and for the other three tone
diacritic symbols that should also be included in a proposal:“◌쎶 ”A95C COMBINING MACRON-ACUTE“◌쎘 ”A95D COMBINING GRAVE-MACRON쎸 ”A95E COMBINING GRAVE-ACUTE-GRAVE“◌“◌쎙 ” COMBINING MACRON-GRAVE“◌쎷 ” COMBINING ACUTE-MACRON“◌쎹 ” COMBINING ACUTE-GRAVE-ACUTE

Chao tone letters
The majority of characters in this proposal—225 out of 320—are for symbols known as
Chao tone letters, after the Chinese linguist, Chao Yuen Ren, who first introduced them.
Five Chao tone letters are already encoded in the UCS:
U+ 02E5 ˥ MODIFIER LETTER EXTRA-HIGH TONE BAR
U+02E6 ˦ MODIFIER LETTER HIGH TONE BAR
Comments on N2626 Page 8 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646
U+02E7 ˧ MODIFIER LETTER MID TONE BAR
U+02E8 ˨ MODIFIER LETTER LOW TONE BAR
U+02E9 ˩ MODIFIER LETTER EXTRA-LOW TONE BAR
Just as N2626 inappropriately proposes spacing combining marks that duplicate existing
non-combining letters and symbols, as discussed above, it similarly proposes fivecombining marks, AA04..AA08, that would duplicate the five tone letters already in the
UCS. As in the previous cases, there is no valid reason for introducing duplicate
characters as combining marks.
Of the 225 proposed tone letters, 100 are for contour tones:
A964..A96D, A978..A981, A98C..A9A9, A9C8..A9E5, AA0E..AA17, AA22..AA2B
These are proposed as combining marks, and the arguments for treating these as noncombining symbols rather than combining marks apply here as above. The more serious
issue for these characters, however, is that these should all be considered presentation
forms: these are ligatures, and can be represented as sequences using various
combinations of the five UCS characters listed above. This is illustrated by the examples
in Table 3:
Contour tone letter

Proposed character

UCS character sequence

깦
긁
굕
깸

A966
A9A1
A9DB
AA24

02E9 ˩ + 02E6 ˦
02E5 ˥ + 02E9 ˩ + 02E7 ˧
02E7 ˧ + 02E6 ˦ + 02E9 ˩
02E7 ˧ + 02E8 ˨

Table 3. Representation of contour tone letters as sequences of UCS characters

This representation for contour Chao tone letters has been described in The UnicodeStandard since at least version 2.0,11 and is discussed in greater length in documents
N2307 and N2312. Thus, these 100 proposed contour-tone characters should be rejected.
The proposal also includes 110 (non-combining) characters for tone letters used inindicating tone sandhi.12 In Chinese linguistics, utterances in which tone sandhi occurs
are sometimes transcribed using paired tone letters: one right-stemmed tone letter on theleft, indicating the underlying tone, and a left-stemmed tone letter on the right, indicating
the surface “sandhi” tone. This is illustrated in Figure 12:

11

See The Unicode Standard, Version 2.0, p. 6-13; or, The Unicode Standard, Version 3.0, p. 178; or
The Unicode Standard, Version 4.0, p. 185.
12
Sandhi is a linguistics term referring to the modification of a speech sound when juxtaposed withother sounds. Thus, tone sandhi refers to a change in tone, and is typically conditioned by the tone orstress of surrounding syllables.
Comments on N2626 Page 9 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646

Figure 12. Words with tone sandhi transcribed using right- and left-stemmed tone letters (Shunde 1986, p. 26)”

The proposal in N2626 is to treat each of these right- and left-stemmed tone letter pairs as
an atomic character:Figure 13. Proposed digraph characters for sandhi tone: A9EA

Two details should be noted in relation to these characters. First, the left-hand component
in each sandhi character uses dotted strokes. The sample in Figure 12 demonstrates that
linguists do not always use dotted strokes. That is not a significant issue, however, as thedotted versus solid distinction can be considered a font variation—I am not aware of any
semantic significance applied to the dotted-stroke forms.13
Secondly, all of the characters in the proposal use exactly the same left-hand component,
using the shape that, on its own, would be used to indicate level high tone. I find it
surprising that this would be the case as the available evidence indicates that linguists use
various forms, including contour forms, for the left-hand component of a tone-sandhitranscription, as can be seen in Figure 12 and Figure 14.

13

After completing the initial draft of this document, it occurred to me that the dotted-stroke forms may
have been used by the authors to indicate that these left-stem tone letters are combining marks, and thatthey only combine with the rightt-stemmed tone characters, proposed in N2626 also as combining
marks. If that is the case, portions of my comments are not applicable (though other comments would be
warranted: the need for two levels of spacing combining marks only highlights the fact that these should
really be treated as non-combining characters). My conclusions, however, still apply: I recommend
encoding all Chao tone letters as non-combining characters, and that contour letters be consideredligatures encoded as sequences using combinations of five right-stemmed or five left-stemmed leveltone letters.

Comments on N2626 Page 10 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646

Figure 14. Transcription of sandhi tone (Shen 1989, p. 51)

Thus, it seems appropriate to assume a need for the left-hand component to take any levelor contour shape that might otherwise be required when used for non-sandhi tones.
Encoding sandhi combinations as atomic characters, though, this would require over
10,000 characters.
It has been shown, however, that any of the non-sandhi tones, level or contour, can be
represented using merely the five existing right-stemmed tone letter characters in the
UCS. These can be used to represent the left-hand component of sandhi tonetranscriptions. Similarly, the right-hand components could also be represented using fiveleft-stemmed tone letters.
Thus, I concur with the need to represent sandhi tone combinations, but I propose, rather
than using the 110 atomic sandhi characters proposed in N2626, that this be done using
sequences of the five existing right-stemmed tone letter characters in the UCS in
combination with sequences of five left-stemmed tone letter characters. Accordingly, I
recommend that the proposal be revised to replace those 110 characters with thefollowing:꺊 MODIFIER LETTER EXTRA-HIGH LEFT-STEM TONE BAR
꺉 MODIFIER LETTER HIGH LEFT-STEM TONE BAR
깾 MODIFIER LETTER MID LEFT-STEM TONE BAR

깳 MODIFIER LETTER LOW LEFT-STEM TONE BAR

깨 MODIFIER LETTER EXTRA-LOW LEFT-STEM TONE BAR
Sandhi combinations would then be represented using sequences as illustrated in thefollowing examples:
Sandhicombination

Proposed character

UCS character sequence

˦깿

AA1F

02E6 ˦ + 깾 + 꺉

˦궣
굕깪
깸곙

A9B0
—
—

02E6 ˦ + 깾 + 깨 + 꺉
02E7 ˧ + 02E6 ˦ + 02E9 ˩ + 깨 + 깾
02E7 ˧ + 02E8 ˨ + 깳 + 깨 + 깳

Table 4. Representation of tone sandhi as sequences of level tone characters

Comments on N2626 Page 11 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646
Not only will encoding sandhi combinations as right-stemmed and left-stemmed
sequences accommodate various forms for the left-hand component in a sandhi
combination, it will also simplify supporting sandhi combinations involving dot tone
letters, which I will now discuss.
The remaining ten Chao tone characters in this proposal are for dot tone letters: fivelevels with both right- and left-stemmed forms.

Figure 15. Proposed dot tone letters: AA39, AA3D

Dot tone letters are used in Chinese linguistics to indicate tones in certain weaklystressed syllables having a less-distinct quality—there is little or no pitch variation, andthe duration is short. These are often referred to in Chinese linguistics as “neutral tones”:

Figure 16. Dot tone letters for “neutral” tones (Chao 1968, p. 36)

Dot tone letters can occur on their own with right-stemmed forms, as seen in Figure 16
and also in Figure 17:

Figure 17. Right-stemmed dot tone letters (Shen 1984, p. 40)

They can also occur in sandhi combinations with left-stemmed forms, as seen in Figure
14, above.
Hence, I support the proposal to add these ten dot tone letters to the UCS. I suggest,
however, the following names in order to provide greater consistency with the names forbar tone letters:깝 MODIFIER LETTER EXTRA-HIGH TONE DOT
Comments on N2626 Page 12 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646
깜 MODIFIER LETTER HIGH TONE DOT
깛 MODIFIER LETTER MID TONE DOT

깚 MODIFIER LETTER LOW TONE DOT

깙 MODIFIER LETTER EXTRA-LOW TONE DOT

깘 MODIFIER LETTER EXTRA-HIGH LEFT-STEM TONE DOT
깡 MODIFIER LETTER HIGH LEFT-STEM TONE DOT
깠 MODIFIER LETTER MID LEFT-STEM TONE DOT

깟 MODIFIER LETTER LOW LEFT-STEM TONE DOT

깞 MODIFIER LETTER EXTRA-LOW LEFT-STEM TONE DOT

Conclusion
The characters proposed in N2626 are quite varied in terms of their acceptability andjustification for encoding in the UCS. Some are definitely valid proposals needed byexisting user communities, although additional documentation is needed. Some of thecharacters should be encoded, though only after the proposal has been modified to treat
them as non-combining letters or symbols rather than combining marks, only after certain
unifications have taken place, or only after the proposed names have been revised. Again,
additional information should be provided, particularly illustrative samples.
This proposal also includes many characters, particularly contour tone symbols, that canalready be encoded in the UCS using existing characters.
Significant revision of this proposal is, therefore, recommended.

References
Baldwin, C.C. 1871. Manual of the Foochow dialect. Foochow: Methodist Episcopal
Mission Press.
Chao, Yuen Ren. 1968. A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley, CA: University ofCalifornia Press.
Gilley, Leoma G. 1992. An autosegmental approach to Shilluk phonology. (Summer
Institute of Linguistics and The University of Texas at Arlington publications inlinguistics, 103.) Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and University of Texas at
Arlington.
International Phonetic Association. 1999. Handbook of the International Phonetic
Association: a guide to the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet. Cambridge:
University of Cambridge Press.
Shen, Xiao-nan Susan. 1989. The prosody of Mandarin Chinese. (University ofCalifornia publications in linguistics, 118.) Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press.

Comments on N2626 Page 13 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003

JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2646
Shunde, Jin. 1986. Shanghai morphotonemics. Bloomington, IA: Indiana University
Linguistics Club.

Comments on N2626 Page 14 of 14
Peter Constable October 9, 2003