Richard Wordingham wrote:
> --- In, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...> wrote:
> > That's just a software shortcut -- there's no actual virama when you
> > write a conjunct. But using the conjoined forms is the equivalent of a
> > virama; remember, Tamil is the odd-script-out in South Asia, the only
> > one that's abandoned conjunct forms completely. (Tibetan and Javanese
> > both still use a few of them, and Burmese uses them only in
> > Sanskrit-origin words.)
> Tamil has still got the conjunct. Thai has abandoned conjuncts
> completely. Conjuncts don't straddle syllable borders in Lao or New
> Tai Lue, and it's arguable that the Lao ones are new letters.
> Richard.

IIRC, a lot of the old(er) subscripts in Lao mirror the "conjuncts"
found in the other Brahmic scripts, even though they were a smaller
subset, esp., etc. Modern Lao phonology, however, renders most all
orthographic conjunctions/ligatures opaque.

Older Thai still has fun ligated letters...
I'll see if I can round some up later...