African Reference Alphabet - 1978 Version

1978 Version

Separate versions of the conference's report were produced in English and French. Different images of the alphabet were used in the two versions, and there are a number of differences between the two.

The English version proposed an alphabet of 57 letters, given in both upper and lower-case forms. Eight of these are formed from common Latin letters with the addition of an underline mark (_). Several of the glyphs, mostly upper-case forms, are unusual and cannot (yet) be accurately represented in Unicode.

This version also listed eight accents (acute accent ( ´ ), grave accent ( ` ), circumflex ( ^ ), caron ( ˇ ), macron ( ¯ ), tilde ( ˜ ), trema ( ¨ ), and a superscript dot (˙) and nine punctuation marks ( ? ! ( ) « », ; . ).

In the French version, the letters were hand-printed in lower case only. Only 56 of the letters in the English version were listed – omitting the hooktop-z – and two further apostrophe-like letters (ʾ and ʿ) were included. Also, five of the letters were written with a subscript dot instead of an underscore as in the English version (ḍ, ḥ, ṣ, ṭ and ẓ). (These represent Arabic-style emphatic consonants while the remaining underlined letters (c̱, q̱ and x̱) represent clicks.) Accents and punctuation do not appear. The French and English sets are otherwise identical.

lowercase a ɑ b ɓ c d ɖ ɗ ð
uppercase A B Ɓ C D Ɖ Ɗ
lowercase e ɛ ǝ f ƒ g ɣ h i ɪ
uppercase E Ɛ Ǝ F Ƒ G Ɣ H I ɪ
lowercase j k ƙ l m n ŋ o ɔ p q
uppercase J K Ƙ L M N Ŋ O Ɔ P Q
lowercase r ɍ s ʃ t ƭ ʈ ɵ u
uppercase R Ɍ S Ʃ T Ƭ Ʈ Ɵ U
lowercase ʊ v ʋ w x y ƴ z ʒ
uppercase Ʊ V Ʋ W X Y Ƴ Z Ʒ

Notes:

  • Ɑ/ɑ is "Latin alpha" not "Latin script a" . In Unicode, Latin alpha and script an are not considered as separate characters.
  • The upper case I, the counterpart of the lower case i, does not have crossbars while the upper case counterpart of the lower case ɪ has them .

Read more about this topic:  African Reference Alphabet

Famous quotes containing the word version:

    Truth cannot be defined or tested by agreement with ‘the world’; for not only do truths differ for different worlds but the nature of agreement between a world apart from it is notoriously nebulous. Rather—speaking loosely and without trying to answer either Pilate’s question or Tarski’s—a version is to be taken to be true when it offends no unyielding beliefs and none of its own precepts.
    Nelson Goodman (b. 1906)