Richard,

It is much easier to think about Syllabics in general, if you think
of them as basically reflections first, and realize that they
only 'look like' rotations because some of the shapes are symmetric.

Carrier probably doesn't have as much use as some of the other
syllabics. There was also a tendency for syllabics in general to not
be standardized. The notion of standardization has only been
relevent with computers. You can't really say that anyone has it
wrong here.

People really want to use their writing systems according to their
own personal style. You are trying to think about the reflections
too logically!

Remember that the different churches and organizations had slightly
different ways to write the basic Cree Syllabics, and the different
styles are in Unicode now. Apparently this time, they only encoded
values once, instead of twice, in spite of them looking a little
different.

Both Chris Harvey of Langaugegeek and Bill Poser have been very
prompt with answering email in the past. They are happy to share
their insights. If you cannot find their email on the internet, in
these links you have here, then email me. I have them.

Hope this helps.

Suzanne





--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham" <richard@...>
wrote:

>
> I'm trying to understand the precise geometrical transformations in
> Canadian Syllabics, and I've hit a puzzle. Carrier 'syllables'
> representing a vowel sign are illustrated at
> http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U1400.pdf codepoints 1401, 1402,
> 1405, 1408 to 140A, 142F, 1431, 1433, 1436 to 1438, 15C4 to 1614,

1616

> to 1619, and 161B to 166C and at
> http://www.ydli.org/dldocs/syllipa.pdf (by Poser). Like the best
> known class of syllables in Cree, all syllabics in Carrier are
> basically related by rotation. This works fine for the symbols

that

> are symmetric about the pointing direction (left for /a/, right for
> /@/ - and thus /e/ and /i/, up for /o/ and down for /u/). For

symbols

> with asymmetry at the rear, namely those for vowel plus consonants
> /n/, /m/, /j/ (/y/ in American, CARRIER YU etc. in Unicode), /tS/

(/j/

> in American, CARRIER JU etc. in Unicode) and /tS`/ (CARRIER JJU

etc.

> in Unicode), those pointing horizontally and vertically are

reflected

> about the axis of symmetry relative to one another. This in

itself is

> not a problem.
>
> However, the symbols with an asymmetry to one side are a puzzle.
> These are the ones for consonants /l/, /tlh/ (American /tl/,

Unicode

> CARRIER TLHU etc.), /tl/ (American /dl/, Unicode CARRIER DLU etc.)

and

> /tl`/ (American /tl'/, Unicode CARRIER TLU etc.). The Unicode

chart

> shows the left- and right-pointing syllables as having the

projection

> jutting out upwards, as does the Aboriginal Sans ('absans') font
> (available from

http://www.languagegeek.com/font/fontdownload.html ).

> However, Poser's font shows /tlhe/ and /thli/ (but not /tlh@/!) as
> having the projection pointing down. Things become even more
> confusing for the /u/ and /o/ vowels:
>
> Jutting left:
> Unicode: /lu/, /tlho/, /tlu/, /tl`o/
> Absans: /lu/
> Poser: /lu/
>
> Jutting right:
> Unicode: /lo/, /thlu/, /tlo/, /tl`u/
> Absans: /lo/, /thlu/, /thlo/, /tlu/, /tlo/, /tl`u/, /tl`o/
> Poser: /lo/, /thlu/, /thlo/, /tlu/, /tlo/, /tl`u/, /tl`o/
>
> As you can see, the Aboriginal Sans script agrees with Poser, for

the

> /u/ and /o/ vowels. For /tlhe/ and /thlhi/, it has the projection
> pointing upwards.
>
> What's happening here? Have the Unicode charts got it wrong? Is

the

> choice of position free?
>