Re: boustrophedon more current, not ancient?
Hmmm... I should not have thoughtlessly jumped into the discussion w/o knowing more about the thread, including *why* this information is perceived to be important on the Unicode list. If someone needs to know the details, for some serious research purpose, they should consult with specialists who are current in the field, and not depend upon hobbyists' second-hand impressions, or upon out-of-date handbooks. In this case, I just grabbed two older monographs at hand (to confirm my memory about the proto-Canaanite situation): 1. Joseph Naveh, Early History of the Alphabet, Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1982. 2. P. Kyle McCarter, The Antiquity of the Greek Alphabet, Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1975. Both authors discuss sinistrograde and dextrograde texts, character stance (with respect to the direction of writing), etc etc. as well as "vertical boustrophedon" exemplars. There is a lot of variation, especially in the earliest stages; trends (it appears) emerged as conventions stabilized under various influences. No doubt more recent monographs and technical articles add to the picture as summarized by Naveh and McCarter in these two publications. Please don't take this summary as authoritative in any way; consult with epigraphers who are actively researching and publishing in the field, and who are recognized as authorities. At the frayed edges you will find a lot of pseudo-academic quacks. Robin Cover On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, John Hudson wrote: > At 08:13 PM 12/21/2000 -0800, Robin Cover wrote: > > >See Naveh and others on proto-Canaanite writing - "vertical > >boustrophedon" is a common locution. Vertical alphabetic > >apparently dropped out of use by about 1100 BCE. > > To clarify, is Naveh talking about vertical text -- i.e. glyphs stacked one > on top of another -- or rotated boustrephedon text -- i.e. glyphs > side-by-side but running downwards? I'm assuming the former, from the > context of your comments, but since this thread has been plagued by inexact > and admitedly idiosyncratic terminology I would like to be sure that I > understand you. > > Also, can you cite specific books that include examples of this 'vertical > boustrephedon'. > > Many thanks, > > John Hudson > > Tiro Typeworks | > Vancouver, BC | All empty souls tend to extreme opinion. > www.tiro.com | W.B. Yeats > [EMAIL PROTECTED]| >
Re: boustrophedon more current, not ancient?
At 08:13 PM 12/21/2000 -0800, Robin Cover wrote: >See Naveh and others on proto-Canaanite writing - "vertical >boustrophedon" is a common locution. Vertical alphabetic >apparently dropped out of use by about 1100 BCE. To clarify, is Naveh talking about vertical text -- i.e. glyphs stacked one on top of another -- or rotated boustrephedon text -- i.e. glyphs side-by-side but running downwards? I'm assuming the former, from the context of your comments, but since this thread has been plagued by inexact and admitedly idiosyncratic terminology I would like to be sure that I understand you. Also, can you cite specific books that include examples of this 'vertical boustrephedon'. Many thanks, John Hudson Tiro Typeworks | Vancouver, BC | All empty souls tend to extreme opinion. www.tiro.com | W.B. Yeats [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
Re: boustrophedon more current, not ancient?
See Naveh and others on proto-Canaanite writing - "vertical boustrophedon" is a common locution. Vertical alphabetic apparently dropped out of use by about 1100 BCE. - Robin Cover --- On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Michael Everson wrote: > Ar 13:02 -0800 2000-12-20, scríobh [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > >I have never heard of > >boustrophedon used for vertical text. > > Neither have I. > > ME > > >
Re: boustrophedon more current, not ancient?
Ar 13:02 -0800 2000-12-20, scríobh [EMAIL PROTECTED]: >I have never heard of >boustrophedon used for vertical text. Neither have I. ME
Re: boustrophedon more current, not ancient?
On Wednesday, December 20, 2000, at 01:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 12/20/2000 02:26:24 PM Elaine Keown wrote: > > >> Literally 'boustrophedon' refers to how an ox plows a field. > > And I think that has always been understood in the context of writing to > mean with successive lines running in alternate directions (regardless > of > the direction in which lines follow one another in a paragraph). For > vertical text, the would mean TTB, BTT, TTB, etc. I have never heard of > boustrophedon used for vertical text. > That's what happens when a crab plows a field; I guess one would call it carcinostrophedon.
RE: boustrophedon more current, not ancient?
I insert below an interesting post from Michael Everson to this list some time ago. At the end of an i18n class for our developers, I exempt them from supporting example 10. ... -Kim Peck - Inspired by a comment in the Unicode FAQ. 1. Boustrophedon top-to-bottom: early Greek >>>aa bb<<< >>>cc 2. RTL top-to-bottom: Hebrew, Arabic, Egyptian aa<<< bb<<< cc<<< 3. RTL bottom-to-top: Orkhon (Yenisei, Kök Turki) cc<<< bb<<< aa<<< 4. LTR top-to-bottom: Latin, Cyrillic >>>aa >>>bb >>>cc 4. Downward columns (RTL): Japanese, Chinese, Egyptian v v v v v v v v v m g a n h b o i c p j d q k e r l f 5. Downward columns (LTR): Mongolian, Egyptian v v v v v v v v v a g m b h n c i o d j p e k q f l r 6. Downward in columns of two: Mayan vv vv vv vv vv vv ab kl cd mn ef op gh qr ij st 7. Upward columns (LTR): Batak f l r e k q d j p c i o b h n a g m ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 8. Upward boustrophedon (LTR): Ogham f g h e i d j c k b l a m ^ v ^ v ^ v 9. Rotated boustrophedon: Rongorongo >>>cc qq<<< >>>aa 10. Spiral: Phaistos k l m jc i b d h a e g f == -- Michael Everson, Everson Gunn Teoranta ** http://www.indigo.ie/egt 15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland Guthán: +353 1 478-2597 ** Facsa: +353 1 478-2597 (by arrangement) 27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn; Baile an Bhóthair; Co. Átha Cliath; Éire -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 3:03 PM To: Unicode List Subject: Re: boustrophedon more current, not ancient? On 12/20/2000 02:26:24 PM Elaine Keown wrote: >Literally 'boustrophedon' refers to how an ox plows a field. And I think that has always been understood in the context of writing to mean with successive lines running in alternate directions (regardless of the direction in which lines follow one another in a paragraph). For vertical text, the would mean TTB, BTT, TTB, etc. I have never heard of boustrophedon used for vertical text. - Peter --- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485 E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: boustrophedon more current, not ancient?
On 12/20/2000 02:26:24 PM Elaine Keown wrote: >Literally 'boustrophedon' refers to how an ox plows a field. And I think that has always been understood in the context of writing to mean with successive lines running in alternate directions (regardless of the direction in which lines follow one another in a paragraph). For vertical text, the would mean TTB, BTT, TTB, etc. I have never heard of boustrophedon used for vertical text. - Peter --- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485 E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: boustrophedon more current, not ancient?
Elain wrote: > Chinese and Japanese newspapers are still mostly written in a vertical, > frequently right-to-left, boustrophedon. No, not exactly. They don't go "as the ox plows", and it is entirely improper to utilize the term "boustrophedon" to refer to them. They are written in columns, each of which is read top-down, from right to left. Korean similarly, when vertical. Mongolian, contrarily, is written in columns that begin on the left. > I am not using the word 'boustrophedon' in its usual way In what way are you using it? It seems if not the usual way, then an incorrect way, perhaps? I don't understand what you're getting at... Rick
