ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2 N2641
2003-10-05
Universal Multiple-Octet Coded Character Set
International Organization for Standardization
Organisation internationale de normalisationеждународная организация по стандартизации
Doc Type: Working Group Document
Title:
Proposal to encode one Irish phonetic letter in the UCS
Source: Michael Everson
Status:Individual Contribution
Action:For consideration by JTC1/SC2/WG2 and UTC
Date:
2003-10-05
Irish phonological texts, like all such texts, make use of a number of special symbols to distinguishdifferent sounds. While many researchers use the International Phonetic Alphabet today, a body of
linguistic material exists which makes use of a phonetic notation system which is not unlike the UralicPhonetic Alphabet. One character from that tradition is not yet encoded in the UCS, and is proposed here.
1D79

ÃLATIN SMALL LETTER INSULAR G

The following samples are taken from one of Irish linguistics’ most important works:
Ó Máille, Tomás. 1927. Urlabhraidheacht agus Graiméar na Gaedhilge. Cuid I. Baile Átha Cliath:
Comhlucht Oideachais na hÉireann.

Figure 1. Back consonants. Shown are “open voiced” Ã [V], “open breathed” ¯ [x], “closed voiced” g [g],and “closed breathed” k [k].
Reference can be made here to N1549 On the derivation of YOGH and EZH (1997-04-20), in which it wasdemonstrated that <J> EZH is derived from <z> via a more zed-like shape <ø> and that <É> YOGH wasderived from <Ã> INSULAR G which had become redundant after the Carolingian g was introduced by
Norman scribes in England. The INSULAR G as used in Irish phonetics is not a YOGH, however, and YOGH
glyph shapes are as unacceptable for it as the original insular glyphs shape is for YOGH. It is interesting tonote that the Edlund Medievalist font encodes all three <g>, <Ã>, and <É> as independent glyphs.

1Figure 2. The phonetic symbols used by Ó Máille. Section 342 lists the consonants, and section 343 lists
the vowels. All of these but the INSULAR G can be represented in the UCS at present.
One might recommend writing the interdental letters N, L (in 342.IV above) with N U+0274 and L
U+029F rather than with capitals; Ó Máille has used small capital versions for the voiceless versions ofthese in any case. His rather unusual use of bold-face letters for alveolar consonants (in 342.VII above)
can be handled with the mathematical symbols in Plane 1, though as these sounds are foreign in Irish inany case it is of little consequence. In 343.III, unusually, Greek PHI Ê is used where we would expect ø;this may be a printer’s error though it occurs elsewhere in the book, and a CAPITAL PHI º is used in343.VII. Note the TIRONIAN SIGN ET in 342.X.
2

Figure 3. Sample text of a story called “An Fuadach” (The Kidnapping) told by Peadar Ó Hallmhuráin,
who hailed from near Galway.

Figure 4. The same text in 1927 Roman-face orthography.

A. Administrative
1. Title
Proposal to encode one Irish phonetic letter in the UCS.
2. Requester’s nameMichael Everson
3. Requester type (Member body/Liaison/Individual contribution)
Individual contribution.
4. Submission date2003-10-05
5. Requester’s reference (if applicable)
6. Choose one of the following:
6a. This is a complete proposal
Yes.
6b. More information will be provided later
No.

B. Technical -- General
1. Choose one of the following:
1a. This proposal is for a new script (set of characters)
No.
Proposed name of script
1b. The proposal is for addition of character(s) to an existing block

3

Yes.
1b. Name of the existing block
Phonetic extensions.
2. Number of characters in proposal
1
3. Proposed category (see section II, Character Categories)
Category A.
4a. Proposed Level of Implementation (1, 2 or 3) (see clause 14, ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000)
Level 1.
4b. Is a rationale provided for the choice?
No.
4c. If YES, reference
5a. Is a repertoire including character names provided?
Yes.
5b. If YES, are the names in accordance with the character naming guidelines in Annex L of ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000?
Yes.
5c. Are the character shapes attached in a legible form suitable for review?
Yes.
6a. Who will provide the appropriate computerized font (ordered preference: True Type, or PostScript format) for
publishing the standard?
Michael Everson.
6b. If available now, identify source(s) for the font (include address, e-mail, ftp-site, etc.) and indicate the tools used:
Michael Everson, Fontographer.
7a. Are references (to other character sets, dictionaries, descriptive texts etc.) provided?
Yes.
7b. Are published examples of use (such as samples from newspapers, magazines, or other sources) of proposedcharacters attached?
Yes.
8. Does the proposal address other aspects of character data processing (if applicable) such as input, presentation,sorting, searching, indexing, transliteration etc. (if yes please enclose information)?
No.
9. Submitters are invited to provide any additional information about Properties of the proposed Character(s) orScript that will assist in correct understanding of and correct linguistic processing of the proposed character(s) orscript. Examples of such properties are: Casing information, Numeric information, Currency information, Displaybehaviour information such as line breaks, widths etc., Combining behaviour, Spacing behaviour, Directionalbehaviour, Default Collation behaviour, relevance in Mark Up contexts, Compatibility equivalence and other Unicode
normalization related information. See the Unicode standard at http://www.unicode.org for such information on otherscripts.
AlsoseeUnicode
Character
Database
http://www.unicode.org/Public/UNIDATA/UnicodeCharacterDatabase.html and associated Unicode Technical Reports for information needed for considerationby the Unicode Technical Committee for inclusion in the Unicode Standard.
Spacing letter, category “Lo”, bidi category “L” (strong left to right)
1D79

C. Technical -- Justification
1. Has this proposal for addition of character(s) been submitted before? If YES, explain.
No.
2a. Has contact been made to members of the user community (for example: National Body, user groups of the scriptor characters, other experts, etc.)?
Yes.
2b. If YES, with whom?
Nicholas Williams.
2c. If YES, available relevant documents
3. Information on the user community for the proposed characters (for example: size, demographics, informationtechnology use, or publishing use) is included?
Linguists and phoneticians.
4a. The context of use for the proposed characters (type of use; common or rare)
Phonetic transcription.
4b. Reference
As above.
5a. Are the proposed characters in current use by the user community?
Only in older phonetic texts; most researchers use IPA now.

45b. If YES, where?
By linguists and phoneticians.
6a. After giving due considerations to the principles in Principles and Procedures document (a WG 2 standing
document) must the proposed characters be entirely in the BMP?
Yes.
6b. If YES, is a rationale provided?
Yes.
6c. If YES, reference
Latin phonetic character.
7. Should the proposed characters be kept together in a contiguous range (rather than being scattered)?
8a. Can any of the proposed characters be considered a presentation form of an existing character or character
sequence?
No.
8b. If YES, is a rationale for its inclusion provided?
8c. If YES, reference
9a. Can any of the proposed characters be encoded using a composed character sequence of either existing charactersor other proposed characters?
No.
9b. If YES, is a rationale for its inclusion provided?
9c. If YES, reference
10a. Can any of the proposed character(s) be considered to be similar (in appearance or function) to an existingcharacter?
As noted above, it is similar but not identical to the Latin letter yogh.
10b. If YES, is a rationale for its inclusion provided?
10c. If YES, reference
11a. Does the proposal include use of combining characters and/or use of composite sequences (see clauses 4.12 and4.14 in ISO/IEC 10646-1: 2000)?
No.
11b. If YES, is a rationale for such use provided?
11c. If YES, reference
12a. Is a list of composite sequences and their corresponding glyph images (graphic symbols) provided?
No.
12b. If YES, reference
13a. Does the proposal contain characters with any special properties such as control function or similar semantics?
No.
13b. If YES, describe in detail (include attachment if necessary)
14a. Does the proposal contain any Ideographic compatibility character(s)?
No.
14b. If YES, is the equivalent corresponding unified ideographic character(s) identified?

5