Dear Bhante Pesala, Gunnar and friends,

I am not sure about the scholars, but it just happens that I prefer
_the dot over m_ when I work on the exercises in my book. A dot over
is clearer than a dot under, which can be obstructed by the lines in
an exercise book.


metta,
Yong Peng.

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Gunnar Gällmo wrote:

> BTW: Any reason why some Pali scholars prefer 'm dot over instead
of .m dot under? I was under the impression that the PTS standardized
on .mot under some years ago. Is that correct?

Perhaps simply because a dot under other letters - n, d, and t - has
another function. A dot *over* another letter appears only in the
case of n, and although officially "n is pronounced as an ng sound,
while "m marks the nazalization of the previous vowel, in practice
the result is often identical.