April 2018 - Indic-texts - lists.tei-c.org

Re: [Indic-texts] indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 8
by Camillo Formigatti 14 Apr '18

14 Apr '18

(I might try and get money from the Bodleian, let's cross fingers.) Dr Camillo A. Formigatti John Clay Sanskrit Librarian Bodleian Libraries The Weston Library Broad Street, Oxford OX1 3BG Email: camillo.formigatti(a)bodleian.ox.ac.uk Tel. (office): 01865 (2)77208 www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk GROW YOUR MIND in Oxford University's Gardens, Libraries and Museums www.mindgrowing.org -----Original Message----- From: indic-texts-bounces(a)lists.tei-c.org [mailto:indic-texts-bounces@lists.tei-c.org] On Behalf Of indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org Sent: 13 April 2018 11:00 To: indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org Subject: indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 8 Send indic-texts mailing list submissions to indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org You can reach the person managing the list at indic-texts-owner(a)lists.tei-c.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of indic-texts digest..." Today's Topics: 1. TEI Conference 2018 (Patrick McAllister) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 12:09:24 +0200 From: Patrick McAllister <patrick.mcallister(a)oeaw.ac.at> To: "indic-texts\(a)lists.tei-c.org" <indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org> Subject: [Indic-texts] TEI Conference 2018 Message-ID: <8737003fe3.fsf(a)oeaw.ac.at> Content-Type: text/plain Dear list members, I would like to set up a meeting of our SIG at the TEI Conference 2018 in Tokyo. Are any of you planning to attend the conference and would you be interested to have a short (1-2 hours) meeting? (The CFP is here: https://tei2018.dhii.asia/node/5, by the way.) Best wishes, -- Patrick McAllister ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ indic-texts mailing list indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts End of indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 8 *****************************************

3 4

Re: [Indic-texts] indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 8
by Camillo Formigatti 13 Apr '18

13 Apr '18

Dear Patrick, This sounds like a very good idea and sure, I'd like to participate. Unfortunately, here comes the but, namely I have now a strict policy of not going to conferences for which I have to pay a fee and/or all expenses. I believe this way of organizing conferences is a rip off of scholars and an obstacle to a true exchange of ideas, as only the more rich scholars can afford to go to such conferences. In fact, I believe that we always ought to at least get full reimbursement of the costs-actually we should also be paid a fee for our work, because let's face it, when we present our research at conferences, we are basically working for free. That being said, I really believe it's a wonderful idea! Best wishes, Camillo Dr Camillo A. Formigatti John Clay Sanskrit Librarian Bodleian Libraries The Weston Library Broad Street, Oxford OX1 3BG Email: camillo.formigatti(a)bodleian.ox.ac.uk Tel. (office): 01865 (2)77208 www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk GROW YOUR MIND in Oxford University's Gardens, Libraries and Museums www.mindgrowing.org -----Original Message----- From: indic-texts-bounces(a)lists.tei-c.org [mailto:indic-texts-bounces@lists.tei-c.org] On Behalf Of indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org Sent: 13 April 2018 11:00 To: indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org Subject: indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 8 Send indic-texts mailing list submissions to indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org You can reach the person managing the list at indic-texts-owner(a)lists.tei-c.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of indic-texts digest..." Today's Topics: 1. TEI Conference 2018 (Patrick McAllister) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 12:09:24 +0200 From: Patrick McAllister <patrick.mcallister(a)oeaw.ac.at> To: "indic-texts\(a)lists.tei-c.org" <indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org> Subject: [Indic-texts] TEI Conference 2018 Message-ID: <8737003fe3.fsf(a)oeaw.ac.at> Content-Type: text/plain Dear list members, I would like to set up a meeting of our SIG at the TEI Conference 2018 in Tokyo. Are any of you planning to attend the conference and would you be interested to have a short (1-2 hours) meeting? (The CFP is here: https://tei2018.dhii.asia/node/5, by the way.) Best wishes, -- Patrick McAllister ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ indic-texts mailing list indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts End of indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 8 *****************************************

1 0

TEI Conference 2018
by Patrick McAllister 12 Apr '18

12 Apr '18

Dear list members, I would like to set up a meeting of our SIG at the TEI Conference 2018 in Tokyo. Are any of you planning to attend the conference and would you be interested to have a short (1-2 hours) meeting? (The CFP is here: https://tei2018.dhii.asia/node/5, by the way.) Best wishes, -- Patrick McAllister

1 0

Re: [Indic-texts] some problems with encoding parts of akṣaras in manuscript transcriptions
by Charles Li 10 Apr '18

10 Apr '18

Hi Andrew! So brave to be the first person to post! I have also struggled in silence and darkness with those very problems which you describe. For the first issue -- vowel signs being added and deleted -- I do something similar, but using slightly non-canonical TEI. I actually include the consonant inside a <subst> tag to make explicit the fact that it's that consonant being modified. So, for example, abhi<subst>dh<del rend="implied">a</del><add>ā</add></subst>ne This has the added advantage of making it easier to render this in devanāgarī and other abugida scripts. See here: http://saktumiva.org/wiki/dravyasamuddesa/17-chennai?upama_scroll=c3.2.6-1 and the same in devanāgarī: http://saktumiva.org/wiki/dravyasamuddesa/17-chennai?upama_scroll=c3.2.6-1 in malayālam: http://saktumiva.org/wiki/dravyasamuddesa/17-chennai?upama_scroll=c3.2.6-1&… and telugu: http://saktumiva.org/wiki/dravyasamuddesa/17-chennai?upama_scroll=c3.2.6-1&… With regards to the second issue -- I also have this problem, but I have yet to find an elegant and simple way to encode it. It would be such a chore to split an akṣara into parts every time you hit a string hole or a line break... Best wishes, Charles

6 5

Re: [Indic-texts] indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 5
by Camillo Formigatti 04 Apr '18

04 Apr '18

Dear Daniel, Thanks a lot for the input, I agree with your approach! As to the @type or @rend, well I confess when I decided to use the @type, I had just started working with TEI. I see what you mean when you say that the according to the ENRICH or EpiDoc schemas' definition of the @rend might make you think that it is better to use this instead of the @type, but on the other the @rend should probably be used to describe how something is rendered in the original source materially, but not in terms of the typology. In other words, an expunction might have a different function than an erasure, since in the first case you can still read the aksaras, while in the second the correction obliterates what is beneath. In other words, again what counts is how we look at manuscripts, then we go about deciding what to mark up (and in the end, it is all about being consistent, right?). Ideally, we should try and create our own TEI documentation for South Asian manuscripts and texts. If we'll ever do that, I too would probably go for the @rend, just because it seems that most of you preferred to choose this attribute instead of @type (but this is because you want to emphasize one aspect over the other), and I am a huge fan of standardization. I don't know if what I've written makes sense or not, but again it's more about manuscript description that TEI strictly. Best wishes, Camillo Dr Camillo A. Formigatti John Clay Sanskrit Librarian Bodleian Libraries The Weston Library Broad Street, Oxford OX1 3BG Email: camillo.formigatti(a)bodleian.ox.ac.uk Tel. (office): 01865 (2)77208 www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk GROW YOUR MIND in Oxford University's Gardens, Libraries and Museums www.mindgrowing.org -----Original Message----- From: indic-texts-bounces(a)lists.tei-c.org [mailto:indic-texts-bounces@lists.tei-c.org] On Behalf Of indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org Sent: 04 April 2018 11:00 To: indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org Subject: indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 5 Send indic-texts mailing list submissions to indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org You can reach the person managing the list at indic-texts-owner(a)lists.tei-c.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of indic-texts digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: some problems with encoding parts of ak?aras in manuscript transcriptions (Balogh D?niel) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 11:06:27 +0200 From: Balogh D?niel <danbalogh(a)gmail.com> To: indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org Subject: Re: [Indic-texts] some problems with encoding parts of ak?aras in manuscript transcriptions Message-ID: <a53f06f2-434d-aac4-1a5d-0e33de905708(a)gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Hello all, and let me add my thanks to Andrew for starting a thread. I've read your opinions with interest and have little new to add, but here are my thoughts anyway. My approach is based on encoding texts in Romanised form (whether IAST or SLP doesn't matter). My basic feeling is that marking up every little feature may not be worth the trouble. I believe this is what Camillo has been suggesting and what Peter has shown in his example. So reflecting changes on the level of phonemes should be fine, and a change of one vowel to another can be marked up simply as <subst><del>o</del><add>?</add></subst>. The deletion and the addition could be qualified with attributes as in Andrew's original post. I believe the generic solution (recommended in EpiDoc) would serve well: <subst><del rend="corrected">o</del><add place="overstrike">?</add></subst> Exactly how this change is implemented graphically in the written specimen is, as Camillo says, something that can be left to the reader's knowledge of the writing system in question; or, in the rare cases where we as editors think it will not be obvious to anyone who cares, described in a comment for human readers only. The same would work for the deletion of vowel m?tr?s i.e. correction of another vowel to "a". Or, if the a is described as implicit for the sake of precision, I would still suggest using the @place attribute with that value, not @type. If it is desired that the encoded text can be rendered in an Indic script, we must keep in mind that this is mainly for the sake of modern readers who are more familiar with those scripts than Romanisation. In most cases, rendering in a Devanagari or Kannada or whatever font will not be a 100% accurate representation of the way complex ak?aras are constituted in the MS. So, in my mind, this is a display issue that needs to be dealt with in the XSLT that produces human-readable output from your markup. Wrapping the entire ak?ara in a <c> element may make the transformation a lot easier. This is similar to what Charles is doing with <subst> but, I believe, entirely canonical. Using <c> to wrap ak?aras may also be an idea to consider for Andrew's second problem, though of course it doesn't solve the problem of the floating r. All the best, Dan ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ indic-texts mailing list indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts End of indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 5 *****************************************

1 0

Re: [Indic-texts] indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 1
by Camillo Formigatti 02 Apr '18

02 Apr '18

(Sorry, I sent the first one by mistake!) Dear Andrew, Peter, and Charlie, Finally somebody started a thread! If you don't mind my being very direct in what I write (I'm smiling, I assure you, because I totally share your doubts about how to mark up such cases), similar questions will always come up if we don't think starting from basic problems regarding how we look at manuscripts. We ought to first agree about the way we describe manuscripts and only then we can start to ask ourselves how to mark up. I believe two questions ought to be asked first (Peter partly pointed out already the first one in his reply): why mark up such phenomena? Also, I would add: to which degree of exactness? As to the first question, there are obvious answers, such as if I'm preparing a diplomatic transcription or a critical edition, I have to do it. Then how? All solutions proposed entail the use of the elements <del></del> and <add></add>, as well as <subst></subst> (as in Charlie's example, who I guess is partly adopting our Cambridge standards), thus with the basic structure <subst><del></del><add></add></subst>. I totally agree with this approach, but... Now let me answer to the first possible objection: in Andrew's example, is the scribe really adding something? Sure he is (let's not get politically correct, we know it was almost certainly a man, even if there is no colophon in the manuscript). He is not materially adding anything on the folio, sure, but what are we marking up? Let's say he wanted to substitute o with ā, then he would have added a mātrā, right? As we all know, the functioning of an abugida writing system rests on the principle of an inherent vowel. The point here is "as we all know." We are marking up transcriptions of manuscripts in scripts of which we know the functioning, so no need to get more catholic than the pope. Also, to a certain extent the scribe was substituting something with something else, by deleting an o and adding an a (or in other cases, a mātrā for any other vowel). I think that this is an elegant way of solving the "implicit" problem, though without using any further element or attribute. The answer to my second question might also provide an answer to Andrew's second conundrum. In our catalogue we adopted two attributes for deletions and additions: for <add></add> we used @place to mark where the addition was made (using the standard values provided in the ENRICH schema), and for <del></del> we used the @type (values =yellow_paste, expuncted, erased, palimpsest, cancelled). I don't know if we can agree about the number or typology of attributes to be used, but this is not so important, as we will always have slightly different approaches, for as Peter pointed out, we have usually have different aims when describing manuscripts. Thinking of the approach I have described above, the "we all know how an abugida works" argument might also solve the conundrum of marking up a whole akṣara or only a part. With this approach, there is no need to mark up only parts of an akṣara, as it is clear that only the mātrā was changed. (Also, no problem for cases of akṣaras divided by string holes, we can always nest the elements, if I get the problem–but I'm not really sure to have understood it.) A belated Happy Eater to you all! Camillo ________________________________________ From: indic-texts-bounces(a)lists.tei-c.org [indic-texts-bounces(a)lists.tei-c.org] on behalf of indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org [indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org] Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2018 11:00 AM To: indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org Subject: indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 1 Send indic-texts mailing list submissions to indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org You can reach the person managing the list at indic-texts-owner(a)lists.tei-c.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of indic-texts digest..." Today's Topics: 1. some problems with encoding parts of ak?aras in manuscript transcriptions (Andrew Ollett) 2. Re: some problems with encoding parts of ak?aras in manuscript transcriptions (Peter Scharf) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2018 22:50:16 -0500 From: Andrew Ollett <andrew.ollett(a)gmail.com> To: indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org Subject: [Indic-texts] some problems with encoding parts of ak?aras in manuscript transcriptions Message-ID: <CAANHO15y_K1BRZLqj+PauXoxcvdgusDS1Df99juUp+W7xkV-Lg(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi everyone, I have two questions about encoding manuscript transcriptions that I wanted to submit to the collective experience of this group. Both relate to the problem of ak?aras having "parts" that canonically occur in a certain sequence but may be changed in a manuscript. First, the cancellation of vowel m?tr?s. Does anyone have a good way to encode this in TEI? In one manuscript (see this link <https://goo.gl/uYxV3R>) the scribe has written "yo?do?da?o?o?a" (the last letter being mostly obliterated by a worm hole), and cancelled out the last "o" (which is written with the sideways "3") with a small cross-mark on top. The problem is that by cancelling out the m?tr?, the scribe has changed the vowel. Since we are transcribing in Roman transliteration, we would have to do something like yo?do?da?o?<del rend="cross">o</del><add type="implicit">a</add>?a, i.e., marking the addition of the vowel as "implicit" (or something similar) in order to make clear that it's not a new mark on the leaf. (If we were transcribing in Kannada script, we could do ??????????<del>?</del>?, but that will surely cause rendering problems.) Second, the "canonical" order of code-points and of transliteration for conjuncts with initial r has the r first. In Kannada script, however, a "flying r" is used, which occurs to the right of the other consonants in the conjunct. Sometimes there's a feature that we want to encode *between* the members of the conjunct, as in this example <https://goo.gl/BqNVg9>, where a string-hole intervenes between the "gg" and the "r" of "m?rgga?". How should we encode this? I know that some of you have used "ak?arapart" to identify m?tr?s and other components of ak?aras, but I can't seem to get around the problem of the reversed sequence of the phonological representation and the graphic representation. Grateful for any help! Andrew

1 0

Re: [Indic-texts] indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 1
by Camillo Formigatti 02 Apr '18

02 Apr '18

Dear Andrew, Peter, and Charlie, Finally somebody started a thread! If you don't mind my being very direct in what I write (I'm smiling, I assure you, because I totally share your doubts about how to mark up such cases), similar questions will always come up if we don't think starting from basic problems regarding how we look at manuscripts. We ought to first agree about the way we describe manuscripts and only then we can start to ask ourselves how to mark up. I believe two questions ought to be asked first (Peter partly pointed out already the first one in his reply): why mark up such phenomena? Also, I would add: to which degree of exactness? As to the first question, there are obvious answers, such as if I'm preparing a diplomatic transcription or a critical edition, I have to do it. Then how? All solutions proposed entail the use of the elements <del></del> and <add></add>, as well as <subst></subst> (as in Charlie's example, who I guess is partly adopting our Cambridge standards), thus with the basic structure <subst><del></del><add></add></subst>. I totally agree with this approach, but... Now let me answer to the first possible objection: in Andrew's example, is the scribe really adding something? Sure he is (let's not get politically correct, we know it was almost certainly a man, even if there is no colophon in the manuscript). He is not materially adding anything on the folio, sure, but what are we marking up? Let's say he wanted to substitute o with ā, then he would have added a mātrā, right? As we all know, the functioning of an abugida writing system rests on the principle of an inherent vowel. The point here is "as we all know." We are marking up transcriptions of manuscripts in scripts of which we know the functioning, so no need to get more catholic than the pope. Also, to a certain extent the scribe was substituting something with something else, by deleting an o and adding an a (or in other cases, a mātrā for any other vowel). I think that this is an elegant way of solving the "implicit" problem, though without using any further element or attribute. The answer to my second question might also provide an answer to Andrew's second conundrum. In our catalogue we adopted two attributes for deletions and additions: for <add></add> we used @place to mark where the addition was made (using the standard values provided in the ENRICH schema), and for <del></del> we used the @type (values =yellow_paste, expuncted, erased, palimpsest, cancelled). Thinking of the approach I have described above, the "we all know how an abugida works" argument might also solve the conundrum of marking up a whole ak ________________________________________ From: indic-texts-bounces(a)lists.tei-c.org [indic-texts-bounces(a)lists.tei-c.org] on behalf of indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org [indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org] Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2018 11:00 AM To: indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org Subject: indic-texts Digest, Vol 3, Issue 1 Send indic-texts mailing list submissions to indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/indic-texts or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to indic-texts-request(a)lists.tei-c.org You can reach the person managing the list at indic-texts-owner(a)lists.tei-c.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of indic-texts digest..." Today's Topics: 1. some problems with encoding parts of ak?aras in manuscript transcriptions (Andrew Ollett) 2. Re: some problems with encoding parts of ak?aras in manuscript transcriptions (Peter Scharf) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2018 22:50:16 -0500 From: Andrew Ollett <andrew.ollett(a)gmail.com> To: indic-texts(a)lists.tei-c.org Subject: [Indic-texts] some problems with encoding parts of ak?aras in manuscript transcriptions Message-ID: <CAANHO15y_K1BRZLqj+PauXoxcvdgusDS1Df99juUp+W7xkV-Lg(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi everyone, I have two questions about encoding manuscript transcriptions that I wanted to submit to the collective experience of this group. Both relate to the problem of ak?aras having "parts" that canonically occur in a certain sequence but may be changed in a manuscript. First, the cancellation of vowel m?tr?s. Does anyone have a good way to encode this in TEI? In one manuscript (see this link <https://goo.gl/uYxV3R>) the scribe has written "yo?do?da?o?o?a" (the last letter being mostly obliterated by a worm hole), and cancelled out the last "o" (which is written with the sideways "3") with a small cross-mark on top. The problem is that by cancelling out the m?tr?, the scribe has changed the vowel. Since we are transcribing in Roman transliteration, we would have to do something like yo?do?da?o?<del rend="cross">o</del><add type="implicit">a</add>?a, i.e., marking the addition of the vowel as "implicit" (or something similar) in order to make clear that it's not a new mark on the leaf. (If we were transcribing in Kannada script, we could do ??????????<del>?</del>?, but that will surely cause rendering problems.) Second, the "canonical" order of code-points and of transliteration for conjuncts with initial r has the r first. In Kannada script, however, a "flying r" is used, which occurs to the right of the other consonants in the conjunct. Sometimes there's a feature that we want to encode *between* the members of the conjunct, as in this example <https://goo.gl/BqNVg9>, where a string-hole intervenes between the "gg" and the "r" of "m?rgga?". How should we encode this? I know that some of you have used "ak?arapart" to identify m?tr?s and other components of ak?aras, but I can't seem to get around the problem of the reversed sequence of the phonological representation and the graphic representation. Grateful for any help! Andrew

1 0

some problems with encoding parts of akṣaras in manuscript transcriptions
by Andrew Ollett 31 Mar '18

31 Mar '18

Hi everyone, I have two questions about encoding manuscript transcriptions that I wanted to submit to the collective experience of this group. Both relate to the problem of akṣaras having "parts" that canonically occur in a certain sequence but may be changed in a manuscript. First, the cancellation of vowel mātrās. Does anyone have a good way to encode this in TEI? In one manuscript (see this link <https://goo.gl/uYxV3R>) the scribe has written "yoṁdoṁdaṟoḷoḷa" (the last letter being mostly obliterated by a worm hole), and cancelled out the last "o" (which is written with the sideways "3") with a small cross-mark on top. The problem is that by cancelling out the mātrā, the scribe has changed the vowel. Since we are transcribing in Roman transliteration, we would have to do something like yoṁdoṁdaṟoḷ<del rend="cross">o</del><add type="implicit">a</add>ḷa, i.e., marking the addition of the vowel as "implicit" (or something similar) in order to make clear that it's not a new mark on the leaf. (If we were transcribing in Kannada script, we could do ಯೊಂದೊಂದಱೊಳ<del>ೊ</del>ಳ, but that will surely cause rendering problems.) Second, the "canonical" order of code-points and of transliteration for conjuncts with initial r has the r first. In Kannada script, however, a "flying r" is used, which occurs to the right of the other consonants in the conjunct. Sometimes there's a feature that we want to encode *between* the members of the conjunct, as in this example <https://goo.gl/BqNVg9>, where a string-hole intervenes between the "gg" and the "r" of "mārggaṁ". How should we encode this? I know that some of you have used "akṣarapart" to identify mātrās and other components of akṣaras, but I can't seem to get around the problem of the reversed sequence of the phonological representation and the graphic representation. Grateful for any help! Andrew

2 1