« Apostrophe » : différence entre les versions

Version du 8 juillet 2008 à 15:52

En typographie française, l‘apostrophe doit être courbe : c‘est une virgule en l‘air.

Elle n‘est pas présente sur la plupart des dispositions sur lesquelles on trouve l‘apostrophe droite « ' ». Sur le fr-dvorak-bépo, quel caractère doit être en accès direct pour taper une apostrophe sachant que d'autres peuvent être placés à des positions moins accessible ?

L’apostrophe : « ' »

Code U+0027.

Pour :

C’est le caractère notant l’apostrophe sur tous les claviers, quelles que soient les langues ;
Il sert de délimitateur d’expression dans une recherche de texte ;
Tous les programmes le reconnaissent comme une apostrophe ;
Il est distingué par la syntaxe unicode des guillemets (les guillemets unicode vont par paire : ouvrant et fermant).

Contre :

Son œil est différent de celui préconisé pour l'apostrophe française (virgule en l'air).

Le guillemet-apostrophe : « ’ »

Code U+2019, rightsinglequotationmark dans xkb et compose, « ’ » en HTML 4, « rsqm » pour les intimes.

Pour :

Est indiqué par le consortium Unicode comme étant le caractère à préférer pour l’apostrophe ;
Plusieurs traitements de textes remplacent automatiquement l'apostrophe U+0027 par ce caractère ;
Il est très souvent employé en fonction d'apostrophe, et par les meilleures sources typographiques ;
Son homologue ouvrant «‘» n'étant pas utilisé en français, on ne peut pas le confondre avec un guillemet dans un texte rédigé en français ;

Contre :

Il n’est pas géré par tous les logiciels ;
Il n'est pas disponible en ISO-8859-15 ;
Il peut provoquer certains bugs s’il est utilisé par inadvertance dans des scripts ;
C'est un des rares caractères introduits par Unicode à avoir deux utilisations, ce qui implique qu'on ne sait pas si c'est un guillemet simple ou une apostrophe.

Le modificateur apostrophe : « ʼ »

Code U+02BC,

This is a spacing modifier letter, i.e. a spacing version of the accent U+0313. The Unicode Standard 5.0 says under the entry for this character:

= apostrophe
glottal stop, glottalization, ejective
spacing clone of Greek smooth breathing mark
many languages use this as a letter of their alphabets

With regards to its identity as a glottal stop, glottalisation, ejective, it is not up to Unicode to decide the phonetic value of a given character. Why should a language, like Goyogo̱hó:nǫ’ (Cayuga), which employs the apostrophe for a glottal stop, use U+02BC while Breton and Mi’gmaq use U+2019? After a discussion on the Unicode mail-list, there are reasons for using U+2019 and reasons for using U+02BC. In my opinion, the best solution is to use U+2019 in almost all instances of apostrophe (except for IPA and spacing clones). There are several important reasons why:

Here’s a situation. A Cayuga writer is typing in the Native language, using U+02BC for apostrophe like the Unicode Standard suggests. At some point, this writer may want to add some English word with an apostrophe, or perhaps a surname like O’Brian. It would be unfair and unrealistic to expect this writer to realise that when typing Cayuga or English, different apostrophe characters are required. Imagine French and English having a different code point for the letter M, so that an English person typing Montréal would need to use the French M instead of the English M. Except in a very few cases where a language encoding standard has already been established using U+02BB and/or U+02BC, neither of the modifier letter apostrophes should be used.
As a spacing clone of the Greek smooth breathing mark, U+02BC must always be a 9-shaped apostrophe. It is not permissable that this character be the slanted shape because this would then look virtually identical to the Greek acute accent. A similar situation exists for some languages which use the Latin script, like Heiltsuk. In Heiltsuk, a letter, like u, can take a Combining Comma Above (U+0313) as in the word u̓w̓íƛ̓itx̣ʷ, and it can take a Combining Acute (U+0301) as in q̓ʷúqʷay̓aítx̣ʷ. If we were to discuss the functionality of thesese two different diacritics in a grammar or textbook, we would use U+02BC and U+02CA. For example, “In Heiltsuk, the apostrophe accent ʼ indicates a glottalised sound, whereas the acute accent ˊ marks high tone.” This way the two characters would be distinct regardless of the style of the typeface. It is clear that if U+02BC could take the slanted shape, it would be indistinguishable from U+02CA. Therefore, wherever it is possible in a language for an apostrophe to appear in the slanted-line form (as in the example from the font Palatino above), we can be sure that it cannot be U+02BC. In every Native language I have seen in North America, the apostrophe can appear in various forms, for example, in Maliseet: dumb quote, 9-shape, slanted line. Consequently, the U+02BC character is not appropriate.
Why use U+02BC or U+02BB? There are two reasons which support using these characters for the apostrophes. 1) When you triple click to select a word, the quotation apostrophes might break the word into two parts. 2) Web site addresses cannot contain puntuation. These are good points, but are not strong enough reasons to outweigh the arguments above. Furthermore, for languages like Lingít (Tlingit), SENĆOŦEN, and Kanyen’kéha, punctuation marks are used for letters anyway (like the period, comma, and colon). So using a modifier apostrophe doesn’t gain one anything.

Autre

Google reconnait les deux comme apostrophe ;
Dans une recherche dans un pdf avec des « ’ » il faut taper ce signe pour trouver l’apostrophe — et vice-versa, ~~je suppose, mais non testé~~ (c'est testé).

Sources

Bien des débats à ce sujet sur wikipédia : voir la page de discussion de la catégorie Apostrophe typographique, les arguments des uns et des autres sur les pages de l'atelier typographique et surtout le résultat du sondage sur l‘utilisation de l’apostrophe typographique. Pensez à lire la page de discussion associée. Azerty a vaincu.

@@ Ligne 46 : / Ligne 46 : @@
 With regards to its identity as a glottal stop, glottalisation, ejective, it is not up to Unicode to decide the phonetic value of a given character. Why should a language, like Goyogo̱hó:nǫ’ (Cayuga), which employs the apostrophe for a glottal stop, use U+02BC while Breton and Mi’gmaq use U+2019? After a discussion on the Unicode mail-list, there are reasons for using U+2019 and reasons for using U+02BC. In my opinion, the best solution is to use U+2019 in almost all instances of apostrophe (except for IPA and spacing clones). There are several important reasons why:
-    *
+* Here’s a situation. A Cayuga writer is typing in the Native language, using U+02BC for apostrophe like the Unicode Standard suggests. At some point, this writer may want to add some English word with an apostrophe, or perhaps a surname like O’Brian. It would be unfair and unrealistic to expect this writer to realise that when typing Cayuga or English, different apostrophe characters are required. Imagine French and English having a different code point for the letter M, so that an English person typing Montréal would need to use the French M instead of the English M. Except in a very few cases where a language encoding standard has already been established using U+02BB and/or U+02BC, neither of the modifier letter apostrophes should be used.
+* As a spacing clone of the Greek smooth breathing mark, U+02BC must always be a 9-shaped apostrophe. It is not permissable that this character be the slanted shape because this would then look virtually identical to the Greek acute accent. A similar situation exists for some languages which use the Latin script, like Heiltsuk. In Heiltsuk, a letter, like u, can take a Combining Comma Above (U+0313) as in the word u̓w̓íƛ̓itx̣ʷ, and it can take a Combining Acute (U+0301) as in q̓ʷúqʷay̓aítx̣ʷ. If we were to discuss the functionality of thesese two different diacritics in a grammar or textbook, we would use U+02BC and U+02CA. For example, “In Heiltsuk, the apostrophe accent ʼ indicates a glottalised sound, whereas the acute accent ˊ marks high tone.” This way the two characters would be distinct regardless of the style of the typeface. It is clear that if U+02BC could take the slanted shape, it would be indistinguishable from U+02CA. Therefore, wherever it is possible in a language for an apostrophe to appear in the slanted-line form (as in the example from the font Palatino above), we can be sure that it cannot be U+02BC. In every Native language I have seen in North America, the apostrophe can appear in various forms, for example, in Maliseet: dumb quote, 9-shape, slanted line. Consequently, the U+02BC character is not appropriate.
-      Here’s a situation. A Cayuga writer is typing in the Native language, using U+02BC for apostrophe like the Unicode Standard suggests. At some point, this writer may want to add some English word with an apostrophe, or perhaps a surname like O’Brian. It would be unfair and unrealistic to expect this writer to realise that when typing Cayuga or English, different apostrophe characters are required. Imagine French and English having a different code point for the letter M, so that an English person typing Montréal would need to use the French M instead of the English M. Except in a very few cases where a language encoding standard has already been established using U+02BB and/or U+02BC, neither of the modifier letter apostrophes should be used.
+* Why use U+02BC or U+02BB? There are two reasons which support using these characters for the apostrophes. 1) When you triple click to select a word, the quotation apostrophes might break the word into two parts. 2) Web site addresses cannot contain puntuation. These are good points, but are not strong enough reasons to outweigh the arguments above. Furthermore, for languages like Lingít (Tlingit), SENĆOŦEN, and Kanyen’kéha, punctuation marks are used for letters anyway (like the period, comma, and colon). So using a modifier apostrophe doesn’t gain one anything.
-    *
-      As a spacing clone of the Greek smooth breathing mark, U+02BC must always be a 9-shaped apostrophe. It is not permissable that this character be the slanted shape because this would then look virtually identical to the Greek acute accent. A similar situation exists for some languages which use the Latin script, like Heiltsuk. In Heiltsuk, a letter, like u, can take a Combining Comma Above (U+0313) as in the word u̓w̓íƛ̓itx̣ʷ, and it can take a Combining Acute (U+0301) as in q̓ʷúqʷay̓aítx̣ʷ. If we were to discuss the functionality of thesese two different diacritics in a grammar or textbook, we would use U+02BC and U+02CA. For example, “In Heiltsuk, the apostrophe accent ʼ indicates a glottalised sound, whereas the acute accent ˊ marks high tone.” This way the two characters would be distinct regardless of the style of the typeface. It is clear that if U+02BC could take the slanted shape, it would be indistinguishable from U+02CA. Therefore, wherever it is possible in a language for an apostrophe to appear in the slanted-line form (as in the example from the font Palatino above), we can be sure that it cannot be U+02BC. In every Native language I have seen in North America, the apostrophe can appear in various forms, for example, in Maliseet: dumb quote, 9-shape, slanted line. Consequently, the U+02BC character is not appropriate.
-    *
-      Why use U+02BC or U+02BB? There are two reasons which support using these characters for the apostrophes. 1) When you triple click to select a word, the quotation apostrophes might break the word into two parts. 2) Web site addresses cannot contain puntuation. These are good points, but are not strong enough reasons to outweigh the arguments above. Furthermore, for languages like Lingít (Tlingit), SENĆOŦEN, and Kanyen’kéha, punctuation marks are used for letters anyway (like the period, comma, and colon). So using a modifier apostrophe doesn’t gain one anything.
 ==Autre==