There exist, in certain writing S, of the Graphème S which do not have only one immutable form but which adapts according to their position in the word, or context . Thus, with a fundamental graphème allographes are dependant (on the model of Allophone), which do not have the statute of graphèmes independent but are only contextual alternatives of this graphème fundamental. In a more current way, one speaks about binding S . In Typography, this term is however not a Synonyme.
Among the most known writings according to this principle, one finds:
The Arabic alphabetIn the Arabic alphabet, each letter has four allographes, except for a small number of letters whose layout remains invariable. Each alternative is used in a precise context dependant on its place in the word:
- in independent position, when the letter is alone in the word;
- in initial position of a word;
- in median position;
- in final position.
In the beginning, the Arabic alphabet did not have such alternatives, which were born from the deformations implied by the cursive C-W communication, which proceeds by adaptations related to the need for not raising the calame not to stop the feature. Simple nonrelevant alternatives, the allographes then acquired the statute of normalized and obligatory forms. One can illustrate that by the layout of a letter, hāʾ (let us recall that Arabic is read from right to left).
The process having led to differentiation of the allographes is very clear here and depends entirely on the need for not raising the calame:
- the fundamental form is that of the isolated C-W communication: the calame trace a simple closed loop;
- when the letter appears at the beginning of word, the layout starts as for a loop but cannot once finish the closed loop: it must set out again towards the left to allow the junction with the following letter, from where the loop inside the first loop, remained more or less unfinished (certain script writers less close it than in the image presented here);
- in medium of word, it is not possible to trace a simple loop without stopping the feature. Same manner as one traces a F cursive in the Latin alphabet, one proceeds to a double loop. One could have been satisfied with a loop not leaving to the bottom, but such a C-W communication represented already another letter;
- at the end of the word, the loop is simply connected to the preceding letter.
The training of the allographes of each letter can seem difficult. In fact, it is largely facilitated if one keeps in mind which it is not absolutely necessary to respect the constraint of the cursivity: all the letters (except six) of the same word must be dependant and the feature must return on the level of the base line to allow the sequence. It is thus not possible to finish a letter dependant in top or bottom of this letter. The letter ǧīm shows it clearly:
Whereas the letter is finished, in its fundamental C-W communication, by a broad open low loop returning towards the left, this loop must necessarily be cancelled in the dependant C-Ws communication to allow the junction. There thus remains only the upper part of the letter. It is indeed possible neither to continue the feature lower than the line of writing nor to continue to write under this letter. One if not could have imagined that the loop was closed to set out again on the right. It is noticed that the C-Ws communication initial and median are identical: no additional adaptation is indeed necessary. Lastly, the final C-W communication is only one form connected to what precedes by the fundamental C-W communication, the loop being able to reappear.
The syriaque alphabetpréparation
The Hebrew alphabetThe Hebrew alphabet employs five final contextual alternatives. The process is similar to that of Arabic, but much simpler (see opposite). It is noticed that it is mainly about a simplification of the ductus, which lengthens. There one feels a process similar to that which one meets in Greek. These contextual alternatives are obligatory and are found in the cursive C-W communication of the alphabet.
The Latin alphabetOne can compare the processes used for the Arabic alphabet with the situation which a script writer using knows spontaneously the Latin alphabet when he writes in a cursive C-W communication: it will tend to him also to differently trace the letters according to their place in the mot. Seulement, each script writer can develop his own alternatives, which are never relevant and are not standardized. To write by detaching all the letters is not impossible. It is besides as one prints since centuries the majority of the works. Although now left the uses or Lexicalisé be, of the standardized contextual alternatives were however used.
S long and S roundThis character is detailed in the article which to him is devoted.
Summary: The most notable example is that of the S , which was traced differently: S round (our S ) at the end of words, the S long everywhere else:
The S long, resulting from the half Uncial Latin (appeared towards IVe century), was transmitted to all the posterior Latin writings. Its use, at the beginning, did not follow strict rules. Simple alternative of the S , it could be besides used only and in any position. Its layout varied much according to the writing, its localization and the scribe. Gradually, however, it came from there to replace S in all the positions, except finally. This convention was preserved in the Imprimerie until the XIXe century, during which the use, already fluctuating at the end of XVIIIe (in the same work, both S could be used in competition with the S single), entirely loses itself. Currently, of the not informed readers confuse the S long with a F .
Y , J , I , U and vpreparation
The alphabet ouïghourpreparation
The Greek alphabetOne finds in Greek two alternatives contextual.
SigmaDans this part, one employed like character to represent the “lunar” sigma the Latin letter C / C and not the Greek character, which is not always present in the font faces. Although the two characters do not have normally exactly the same layout, they are very close. It will be enough to substitute Ϲ / ϲ (U+03F9 and U+03F2) for C / C (U+0043 and U+0063) to obtain a writing correcte.
The letter sigma , σ, is obligatorily written in end mot.
It is noted that this alternative does not exist in capital S: indeed, the final sigma is latest of the four standardized alternatives of the sigma , letter whose history is complex:
- the first C-W communication standardized for this letter (into 403 before our era) is the capital Σ;
- in IIIe century before our era, it traces C ('' lunar sigma '' of the Onciale), by simplification of the layout, forms which, being essential thereafter, will be preserved until VIIIe for the letter whatever the breakage, XVIIIe for the capital alone;
- when the tiny cursive ones (known as Byzantine ) started to develop (between IIIe century before our era and VIIIe century of our era for the first period then until IXe for the second, that during which layouts of the capital type were reintroduced), initially parallel to the C-W communication in capitals, then to replace this one, the cursive sigma (“tiny”) roughly speaking traced initially C then σ (towards the VIII E century; this form is inspired by the first, but even more cursive, and was kept until today);
- it is necessary to await the XV E century so that the printers start to use, sporadically then systematically, the final form, derived from the lunar sigma , is. This layout is however former: between the XI E and the XV E century, one finds sometimes C like final alternative (C-W communication not having been entirely replaced by σ), which is provided with a final tail (representing the return of the calame finishing the word) from the XIII E century;
- it is necessary to wait the XVIIIe century so that the capital sigma is again traced Σ, the C-W communication being borrowed by will classicist from the ancient inscriptions; sometimes
- the lunar sigma (in capital or tiny) however was not forgotten and gets busy in manner archaïsante (and somewhat politicized because there remains related to the Byzantine Church, which still makes use of it). Lastly, one frequently meets it in the papyrological editions: it allows indeed, in the context of a lacunar text in which one always does not seize the identity of the words (end and beginning), to avoid specifying if such or such sigma is really at the end of the word since one traces this letter C in capital and C into tiny, whatever its place in the mot.
In conclusion, one currently obtains the following couples:
- initial forms and medians: Σ/σ or C/C;
- final forms: Σ/or C/C.
Only Σ/σ/is considered not marked. It is necessary, moreover, to note that the final sigma gets busy only at the end of the word and not of Morphème: one will be able, in a didactic text, to cut out a word in his morphemes. In this case, a sigma located before the cut will not be written with its final alternative. As follows:
- “Πελοπόννησος Pelopónnêsos is an old syntagm Lexicalisé Πέλοπος νῆσος which, by univerbation, passed to Πελοπόσ-νησος, from where Πελοπόννησος”;
- “in the sigmatic Aorist S, the endings are added to a topic finished by a sigma: ἐλυσ- + - α, - ας, - ε, - αμεν, - ατε, - ασι”.
BetaIn the French philological tradition exclusively, the beta , only into tiny, traces β only at the beginning of mot. Ailleurs, it takes the buckled form ϐ: ΒΑΡΒΑΡΟΣ/βάρϐαρος bárbaros , “barbarian”.
Buckled beta is borrowed from the handwritten cursive C-W communication. For this reason, the Greeks can thus trace with the hand all beta , independently of its position, like esthetic alternative. France is the only country to use this typographical convention.
- Typography, writing;
- joint Letter;
- additional Letters of the Latin alphabet, additional Letters of the Greek alphabet;
|Random links:||Chantillac | Gelugor | Holy-Foy-the-long | Azpeitia | Third district of Martinique | |