No problem Raphael :)
> Please, David, cite a single example. Just one.
one example to show what?
You are correct that most people don't indicate the shva na at the beginning of the word and for that reason you were convinced that the shva at the beginning of the word is a shva nach!
In Koren, you will be pleased to know, we indicate the shva na at the beginning of the word.
I don't know if I accept your comment of:
Most everybody places a graphic symbol over a shvana in the middle of a word.
I am pretty sure that if I went into a Jewish Book shop in the neighbourhood, I'll find ten times more siddurim with a larger shva as a shva na than a rafe or football on top. Heck, I don't even have to leave the office... my boss has a nice collection of siddurim and... yep they all have larger shvas. No footballs, no rafes, no stars.
Yes Artscroll puts a rafe. Chabad puts stars or footballs (don't remember which was which), but that's really a minority when you come to Israel.
Raphael, I would be interested in your view of William Chomsky's discussion of the shva. Perhaps his view that spoken Hebrew is really more accurate is irrelevant for siddurim because there is a tradition since 12th century of influence the views of Kimchi, which would put the shva na where Chomsky would not. So the tradition, though more recent as Jewish history goes, rules. Is that your view?
Bill -- ohh I'm sorry... I didn't post about Chomsky & sheva :^) ; there're problems with his article --my opinion, of course; but I'll post about that and other issues.
(there's a new title about phonetics, pronunciation, spoken Hebrew -- if I have it today or tomorrow I'll add it to the post; if not -- next time)
I'm certainly no expert, but what our Rabbinical Grammarians say is that the pronunciation of the Hebrew in the siddur should reflect the period that the prayer was said. So for example, in Koren, the priestly blessing is Ye-va-rekh-kha (ie shva nach on 3rd syllable) and not Ye-va-re-khe-kha (ie shva na) as is in siddurim such as the Artscroll.
Unfortunately I have the luxury of an extremely professional staff whom I trust implicity and therefore don't have to learn too much grammar (I just ask them what to put where :-) ) so I don't really know much more than this.
That doesn't sound very professional I know, but I can certainly tell you how much I kerned the nun and yud :-)
It looks like this Hebrew pronunciation is a giant detective puzzle that nobody can quite figure out--something like the rest of life :)
לדעתי שוא נע ונח ודגש חזק אפשר לתכנת בפונט בפשטות
מה שנוגע נניח לקמץ קטן יש בעיה
אלו מילים שצריך פשוט להכיר
מי שדובר עברית יקל עליו המלאכה
ע"פ רוב אלו מילים שמנוקדים בקמץ וגם מבטאים את המילה כקמץ כמו 'אניה' למשל
בעברית המדוברת מבטאים קמץ כפתח
מה שנוגע למתג גם כמעט ואי אפשר
שווא נח ושוא נע
ישנם 5 כללים לשווא בניקוד ו5 בטעמים
הפונט אינו צריך אלא רק לבדוק את מקרי השוא נח
שווא בראש מילה היא תמיד נע בסוף מילה היא תמיד נח
שני שוואים רצופים הראשון נע והשני נח
שווא אחרי תנועה גדולה כמו קמץ השווע תמיד נע אחרי תנועה קטנה הוא נח (כמו סגל)
אם יש דגש באות השווא תחתיו הוא תמיד נע והוא מבטל את הכללים האחרים
בשני אותיות דומות כמו מתפללים השוא הוא תמיד נע
כרגע מהשדוברכאן לגבי 'ה' הידיעה
תמיד האות אחרי ה-הידיעה תבוא דגושה
והואיל ודגושה הוא כלל ברזל לגבי שווא נע השווא תחתיו תמיד תהיה נע
SUB LOOKUP shevanach [RTL]
sheva -> shevanach
he patah |
SUB LOOKUP FixSheva [RTL]
shevanach -> sheva
[Context Before | Context After]
זהו בגדול כל מה שצריך כדי השפונט ידע להחליף גליף של שווא רגיל בשווא נח
מה שנוגע למיקום טעמי מקרא
הכל מסיאס 2 ואופיס 2007
המיקום של טעמים הוא מאוד פשוט
בשלב הראשון עושים
כאשר הניקוד חוזר ביחס של חצי של רוחב הטעם
כעת ממקמים את הטעם לניקוד שהוזח אחורנית
כך הניקוד תמיד יושב נכון ביחס לאות
אז מתקנים את המקרים
בסיאס רגיל הפעולה מזיחה את הניקוד קדימה במקום אחורה וזאת בגלל שסיאס אחד לא יודע לטפל בפייר אבג'סמנט בימין לשמאל
מה שתוקן בסיאס 2
this is an example usig this technique
not yet place abov ttamim on keft side of last letters
but you can see how this technique works great
Which font design is this? Are you the designer?
It is both traditional judging from many design aspects, but it is also modern, because of different design aspects.
Shall I elaborate?
Usually, Biblical text is set in very traditional designs, like Vilna, Koren, or Hadasa (semi-modern). Rarely, is Biblical text set where the stroke width is uniform, as in the sample.
In a sense a uniform stroke width allows greater readability, like the advantages of sans-serif designs, such as Hevetica, versus serif designs, such as Times-Roman, but in my opinion non-uniform stroke widths allow the design greater creativity in creating a beautifil design, such as Bodoni or Vilna.
Do you agree?
Uniform design give a more static and cleant look and smooth typographic color.
where nonuniform design will give a dirtier look because of contrast between horizontals and verticals strokes, but give a much more dynamic look.
readability has meny aspects in both (uniform and non uniform) designs.
Yes, I'm the designer of this font
Your design is very good. Does this font have a name? Do you have a sans version.
I created sans and san serif designs based on Ariel Hebrew, by my friend Boruch Gorink, a Lubavitcher in Crown Heights Brooklyn, called Safed. I think that I posted a sample.
Safed is also a uniform stroke weight. I want to created also a set of non-uniform stroke widths, where the vertical stroke widths are wider than the horizonal ones, for the Hebrew only users, and where the horizontal stroke widths are wider than the vertical ones, for the Western users and/or mixing with Roman languages.
In your email message you refer to helping, but I am unsure to what you are referring. Are you referring to Volt programming?
Shabbat shalom, and a ktiva vChatima tova!
Btw, I would change the angle of the left horizontal stroke to match the tet's left horizontal stroke.
In this way, the left space would be roomier, and appear not so "dark" from a distance.
I would create a non-nikkud version of the ayin, where the right horizontal stroke reaches farther below the baseline.
I would shorten the top vertical bar of the gimmel to increase the "breathing space". Most designers do not extend the top vertical bar of the gimmel to equal the length of the bottom stroke.
See the noon for a good example.
I will comment upon the aleph later. There are excellent design elements there, but I question the validity of the "spitz" in the top left hand part. Although the intention to make the aleph match other letters is important, I think it may be excessive, as most designers do not do so.
"In your email message you refer to helping, but I am unsure to what you are referring. Are you referring to Volt programming?"
also, if u r planing of developing your fonts with TAAMEY MIKRA and Sheva na/nach Ect'
i might be able to help with some usefull info.
it's really impressive, what you people are talking about.
im not sure i understand all of it. :)
Asrei yoshvei beyteychem
John Hudson told me that the Volt programmers at Microsoft observed that Biblical Hebrew represented the ultimate test of Volt programming. Is anything more complex?
I think that a full hebrew project is the most comlex in the world.
my project for example contains thousands of lines of context
Here is a sample of automatic sheva na-nach ect'
That's not quite what I said, Israel. What I actually said is that my VOLT project for SBL Hebrew was the most complex Sergey had seen at that date. Since then, I've made the Gabriola display typeface, which is more complex than the SBL Hebrew, and am now working on an Arabic project that is more complex still.
Biblical Hebrew is complex because of the contextual behaviour of the marks. The Gabriola font is complex because of the multiple stylistic options and the contextual behaviour of the letters. The Arabic involves contextual behaviour of both letters and marks, as well as contextual interaction between the two.
Biblical Hebrew is certainly complex, but because the rules for mark behaviour are established by the masoretic codices, the limits of that complexity are quite circumscribed. The actual letters are very regular and do not connect or otherwise interact -- even in the cursive style, Hebrew is notable for involving very little ligation --, so as long as one has worked out the contexts for the vowel and accent behaviour one has reached the extent of the complexity.
[Performing automatic sheva na-nach ect' at the glyph substitution level will certainly add to the complexity of VOLT contextual lookups, but as I've argued before, I don't believe that semantic distinctions should be made at the glyph level even when it is possible, and if something requires dictionary support in some instances then that's all the more reason for it so be a character level operation.]
John, let me disagree with you on that.
first, open type operates fast and is online, not as a script that takes more time and must be ran every timr a change is made.
second. this product is wanted and used bt meny publishers who find it very usful.
third, becouse their is no unicode for shevana, there is no standart where these glyphs should be.
doing a task like this manualy for an intire TANACH would take years.
if it works, and works well, there is no reason not to take an OT solution.
this debate what shold be done at glyph level and what at thr character level does not cocern me, as long as the job is accomplished.
My point is that there should be a Unicode for shevana, just as there is to distinguish the different qamats. This is a semantic distinction that some users wish to make, and semantic distinctions are properly handled at the character level, because they should not be lost just because the user changes fonts. I'm happy for you if you have a solution that works for your needs, but your needs are not everyone's needs and having a clear understanding of what belongs at the character level and what belongs at the glyph level is necessary to standardisation of text encoding and display.
In normal modern hebrew there is no need for qamats qatqan and sheva na.
in traditional hebrew they come to use, but remember, in traditional text we use traditional type faces.
Frankruel, Haddasa, Vilna, Droglin, Koren, Ivri.
Publishers from all over the world order my developments, because who ever needs these distinctions have no other solution but the solution i provide.
until now there is no other solution like a program or script do complete the task.
So this argument is more of principle than actual.
if you can come up with a better solution, be blessed.
Yes, it is an argument from principle, but in the area of text encoding principle tends to win out eventually. Sheva na was not proposed to Unicode at the same time as qamats qatan because there was uncertainty over the best way to encode it. Mark Shoulson, who co-wrote the qamats qatan encoding proposal, documented three different ways of representing the sheva na in text, as used by three different major publishers. If I recall correctly, two involved marks below the letter and one involved a mark above the letter. Since Unicode encodes what is 'on the page' rather than semantics, this presented a confusing case, and Mark decided to proceed with the simpler qamats qatan encoding proposal independent of the sheva na issue. Since then, I get the impression that there might be more agreement on the 'proper' way to indicate sheva na, and hence an encoding proposal might be easier to produce and have approved.
I've written to Mark to bring this discussion to his attention, in case he wants to comment on or correct anything that I've written.
I'm not criticising your fonts Eli, and I understand that your very clever OTL approach is the only current option. I'm just saying that a semantically significant text entity should be an encoded character, not a glyph variant, and that based on this principle sheva na should be encoded in Unicode.
Jhon, I Get The filling taht you are way up there, and hav influence to change things
if so, i wish to have a conversation with yor about some issues.
my mail firstname.lastname@example.org
Typograph: John is absolutely correct in that the shva nach should not and actually from a grammatical point of view actually cannot be encoded into the font.
What you have to know is that the shva na/nach is contextual and editorial. For example, let's take the Priestly Blessing. Is it, Yevarekhekha or Yevarekhkha? Ie is the second shva a na or nach? It's an editorial decision and based on the source of the text.
> Here is a sample of automatic sheva na-nach etc'
Can you point how it automatic with (before OpenType) and with (after OpenType)?
As a programer I think i could write an application to do this at a character level.
As you understand I am mainly a simple type designer who tries to give typographic solutions.
when giving a solution as OT it's easier to protect your work than an application that any one can make an iligale copy and use it and you can never proove it where with a font you can recognize the type face as yours.
Befor the Ot Functions all sheva's dagesh and qamats are normal.
I do not understand
Not being familiar with what Qamatz Qatan, Shva Na, and Meteg are, I looked them up on the Internet.
I see that there is more to this than the issues addressed in some of the papers about typesetting Hebrew with TeX, which discuss such matters as having a symmetry axis for each letter to govern positioning of vowel points when more than one vowel point symbol is applied to the same letter.
Specifically, Kamatz Katan, for example, is an alternate form of one vowel point used to indicate an alternate pronunciation which no longer exists in modern Hebrew.
So the question isn't really "can this be automated", but rather "does one wish to automate this". Many word processors include dictionaries for the purpose of spell-checking. One could, theoretically, have a Latin font that comes with a very long embedded program which also does spell checking, but if that's inside the font, then there's no interface with which to override any decisions the font makes to change the spelling of a word you want to print.
There are things that can't be automated within a font in a useful manner even if they're not so complicated that they can't be handled algorithmically - because the font is the wrong place to do it.
John S., the Kamatz Katan is pronounced differently in modern Hebrew, like an "o" instead of an "a". Both the question of whether and why have been debated here.
The kamatz katan is encoded by Unicode,
though like the shva-na,
it is merely a grammar issue.
The kamatz katan is used, but rarely.
The shva-na is much more used, but not always.
The shva-na is also a grammar issue.
But the shva-na is not encoded by Unicode.
my font allows overriding with other stylistic sets and at the keyboard level.
The simple fact is, many used these fuctions and enjoyed them.
there might be more elegant ways to deal with the matter, but for now it's the only prctical way.
people don't care for prinsibles, they want a working solution for their needs.
what shoult be done and how, is not a matter the concerns me,
I sleep well at night, and thats what matters :).
> people don't care for princibles...
Shai L'Mora publishes davka prefer Mincha Shai.
Many argue in Chabad the 5th 6h and 7th Lubavitcher Rebbes chose Rabbi Zalman Henna.
The Vilna Gaon, and ArtScroll wanted Rabbi Eliyahu Bachur.
Prof. Aron Dotan vehemently criticized the latter's view.
Eli, did you suggest that Volt should first define each dagesh as dagesh chazak and dagesh kal, because this definition is needed to determine whether a shva was na or nach, as Bill said?
gohebrew, i was'nt refering to grammer.
I was refering rather the sheva na\nach solution should be done at the charater level or OT level
not only sheva but qamats aswell.
there is a rule that sais that any qamats that the following letter has a dagesh hazaq the qamats is qatan unless you hav a qamats under the letter with the dagesh hazaq such as
LAMA ATA (למה, אתה) foe example.
>> charater level or OT level
this is john hudson's view
i think it is incorrect
what is the ot level, if not an ot font?
>> any qamats that the following letter has a dagesh hazaq the qamats is qatan unless you hav a qamats under the letter with the dagesh hazaq
so i need to define dagesh hazak in order to define a kamatz katan or kamatz gadol
is there anything else?
how do i define a dagesh as either chazak or kal?
kollel revach cites words in prayer that if there is no kamatz katan symbol, it is not just mispronounced but means a different word. in short, that word must show a kamatz katan.
is there any word that should have a shva-na, and by not showing a shva-na, it s not just mispronounced but means a different word.
sure, there a sevral.
Vayirau or vayiru
on is to hav Yirah (fear) and the other meaning to see
ויראו העם את ה
did they see him or fear him
sleeping in dirst or two dirt.
Tevel - meleail or melera
melera means world ane tevel mileail asur min hatora
but mostley mimispronouncing means NO SUCH WORD IN HEBREW
gohebrew, may I give you tip before you post your next post:
type away but before you hit the post button on your keyboard do the following:
I have more to say, but inline with point number 2, I'll end this here.
>> ... your personal Hyde Park corner.
There are few things that we do not see eye to eye:
a) the origins of the Koren design
b) the geder גדר of a chilul Hashem חלול השם
c) the worthiness of enabling Jewish children to master Hebrew grammar
versus going after only the holy dollar
d) the integrity and talent of Tzvika R.
e) the necessity to keep Typophile as sterile and impersonal as possible
f) will the NY Yankees win the world series next year
Do you know Propect Park is? I have a corner there...
There are few things that we do not see eye to eye:
> a) the origins of the Koren design
> b) the geder גדר of a chilul Hashem חלול השם
> c) the worthiness of enabling Jewish children to master Hebrew grammar
versus going after only the holy dollar
fairly irrelevant to a forum on font design.
> d) the integrity and talent of Tzvika R.
I have never discussed the talent of Zvika Rosenberg. This is not relevant to me since I use the Koren font at work which is not Zvika Rosenberg's "talent". However, with regards to all my dealings with fonts over many years and several companies, I have found Rosenberg to be incredibly honest. I can only judge a person on my personal experience, but I can publicly say that my dealings with Masterfont from my very first dealings when I made aliya in 1993 at Dfus HaMakor, to the Jerusalem Post, then my only firm and now at Koren has been extremely professional and both him and his wife are an absolute pleasure to do business with.
> e) the necessity to keep Typophile as sterile and impersonal as possible
> f) will the NY Yankees win the world series next year
on this one, I can firmly say that i have no opinion whatsoever. I'm assuming you are talking baseball and not cricket right?
Is it cricket?
I am happy for you that your business dealing with Mr. Rosenberg and his company Masterfont has been good since 1993, after I made yerida in 1988.
Perhaps, I believe lashon hora and motzei shem rah, improper speech and slander.
I know that I have given font software from Ofek, Masterfont, and others in Israel. Most were poorly made, often with missing glyphs. We never used their inferior software.
Rather, new outlines with different bezier control points were created. Often, new US Copyrights were subject to new US Copyright registration, to avoid any legal pikpuk speculation. This has always been my consideration since 1986, when I founded Otzar HaOht, the Typeface Treasury, when Tzvika was riding a bike to Apple Israel's offices at Yeda Computers.
Eli, I do design typefaces. I created the first Arabic font in 1987. I sold Hebrew fonts for bundling with laser printers then as well. I created the first set of BeloRussian typefaces in 1989, when I sold the first Macintosh typesetting system to the post-Gorbachov Minsk-based government. Later, I created and sold Ukrainian fonts for a printer.
I prefer to revive old designs, as they are not available.
I seek to do things that benefit people. On the way, G-d sends me parnasa via different jobs.
I think the automatic shva-na would be a great accomplishment, despite what you and others say. Only G-d knows the future.
I think on behalf of everyone on these forums, we all wish you the best of luck with your automatic shva na. I hope that you indeed accomplish this amazing task (heck they mapped the genome).
Looking forward to seeing the results on this forum in the future.
Thank you, Raphael.
Gohebrew: your ideas and others about Z.Rozenberg and othe type desighers are irellevant and lowers typophile as a proffesional forum.
I do not appreciate talk and criticism of other type designers.
"I think the automatic shva-na would be a great accomplishment, despite what you and others say. Only G-d knows the future."
I did it, so i know it can partially be done to a 99%.
but you first have to know your stuff.
just having matirial is not enough
if teaching is your only intention, design a special font for that perpose and i will make it work with sheva na\nach (it would take me 2 minutes)
funny, comin' from you