{"id":635,"date":"2012-04-27T05:46:14","date_gmt":"2012-04-27T05:46:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.oert.org\/?p=635"},"modified":"2021-02-24T20:05:55","modified_gmt":"2021-02-24T20:05:55","slug":"latin-alphabet-proportions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/latin-alphabet-proportions\/","title":{"rendered":"Latin alphabet proportions"},"content":{"rendered":"
Elaboraci\u00f3n: Marcela Romero<\/div>\n
<\/span>  Art\u00edculo en proceso de traducci\u00f3n <\/div>\n

Roman culture not only consolidated the Latin alphabet but also formally developed the signs. We will analyze some of the fundamental factors in these characters\u2019 technology and morphology, without considering the serif and the stroke, so as to focus on its skeleton: the structure.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Technology and the letter<\/h3>\n

De todas las manifestaciones escritas de los romanos, la que alcanz\u00f3 Of all the Romans\u2019 written manifestations, the one with the greatest formal development was that of tombstones. It clearly shows a formal and aesthetic search, a clear design intention in each letter and in the typographic alphabet as a whole. The material, stone, had also been used by the Egyptians and the Greeks for the clearest versions of the respective writings. <\/p>\n

The signs carved in stone are one of the first examples of typographic design. The way these symbols were built (flat brush and chisel) influenced the shape of each sign and of the alphabet. Function and technology work together to create characteristics which make up the system.<\/p>\n

Tombstone writing<\/h3>\n

the beginning they were mono linear. By the end of the Vth century B.C. Greek capitals became geometrically perfect, with great beauty. Occasionally they were altered by the artist, though they always maintained symmetry. Later on Roman influence made them be drawn with a slight difference in width and terminated with a little serif. <\/p>\n

Roman writing took Greek writing but modified the stroke. Roman capitals were painted with a flat brush before they were carved, thus their stroke is gradual. They made optical adjustments in the signs and in the block, which together with the accurate proportion in strokes made these writings beautiful. Also due to the drawing and carving technique the serif or termination appeared, giving the letter support and stability. The gradual stroke and the serif are specific characteristics of Roman typography.<\/p>\n

Basic structure<\/h3>\n

First we will analyze classic capitals on the basis of the width (or thickness) of the characters and we will then make up groups with characters that share other morphologic characteristics, such as loops, diagonal strokes or crossbars, etc.<\/p>\n

El ancho de los caracteres<\/h3>\n

In order to visualize more clearly the classic structures and the relations supported by each letter, we will analyze them within sets defined according to the width and height of a round letter (the \u00abO\u00bb which, in the case of the Romans, enters within a square) and of a narrow letter (the \u00abE\u00bb which in this case is half the width of the \u00abO\u00bb). Inside these containers we mark the diagonal strokes and intersections with the circle, to take as references the width and other morphologic characteristics which will help us with the analysis.<\/p>\n

\"M\u00f3dulos<\/a>
Para las romanas cl\u00e1sicas la forma contenedora cuadrada deriva de la proporci\u00f3n de la \u00abO\u00bb. El segundo contenedor est\u00e1 formado por dos cuadrados con lado igual a la mitad del anterior.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\"Proporciones<\/a>
Proporciones de la \u201cO\u201d y la \u201cE\u201d cl\u00e1sicas.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Round Letters:<\/em> C, D, G, O, Q. They structurally derive from a circle and, as the rest of the Roman structures, they present optical corrections. In this case, upper and lower curves go slightly beyond the baseline. The \u00abO\u00bb and the \u00abQ\u00bb are as wide as tall, the \u00abC\u00bb, the \u00abG\u00bb and the \u00abD\u00bb are slightly narrower than taller.<\/p>\n

Wide Letters: <\/em>M, W. They go beyond the width of the module, that is, they are wider than the \u00abO\u00bb, and are the widest in the alphabet.<\/p>\n

\"Letras<\/a><\/p>\n

Rectangular Letters: <\/em>H, U, N, T, A, V, Z. The width of these signs is approximately that of the rectangle defined by the intersection of the circle with the diagonals of the square. As these letters share only the width, further on we will analyze them by making up groups with more characteristics in common.<\/p>\n

\"Letras<\/a><\/p>\n

Narrow Letters 1:<\/em> B, E, L, F, P, R, S. Their width is approximately half their height.<\/p>\n

\"Letras<\/a><\/p>\n

Narrow Letters 2:<\/em> I, J, K, Y. They are also narrow, but do not share the width with the ones above nor with each other. The \u00abI\u00bb is the narrowest, followed by the \u00abJ\u00bb; the \u00abY\u00bb and the \u00abK\u00bb are slightly wider than the narrow module.<\/p>\n

\"Letras<\/a><\/p>\n

Morphological relationships <\/h3>\n

A, V, W, M: <\/em>they are related by a central apex, built with a similar angle. The end of the apex goes beyond, by optical correction, the height line or the baseline, depending on the letter. The width of the \u00abA\u00bb and of the \u00abV\u00bb is 3\/4 their height. The crossbar in the \u00abA\u00bb is located below the geometric center to give it more stability and to compensate for its counter forms.<\/p>\n

\"Parentesco<\/a><\/p>\n

The \u00abM\u00bb and the \u00abW\u00bb are the widest letters in the alphabet. The \u00abM\u00bb is as wide (or slightly wider) as tall while the W is slightly wider.<\/p>\n

O, Q, C, D, G: <\/em>are the ones that derive from the circle. The \u00abO\u00bb and the \u00abQ\u00bb are visualized as circles, the tail of the Q, in this case, is long and curved, but may vary in shape and size. The width of the \u00abC\u00bb, the \u00abG\u00bb and the \u00abD\u00bb is approximately 7\/8 their height.<\/p>\n

The \u00abG\u00bb presents a short ascender arm, which does not go beyond the geometric center, and which terminates in an \u00abelbow\u00bb, towards the interior of the letter. This element is not always present. <\/p>\n

The \u00abD\u00bb is contained by horizontal strokes above and below, which give it great support. Also, these letters have similar width.<\/p>\n

La \u00abD\u00bb est\u00e1 contenida arriba y abajo por trazos horizontales, que le otorgan buen apoyo. Estas letras tienen adem\u00e1s un ancho similar.<\/p>\n

\"Parentesco:<\/a><\/p>\n

E, F, L: <\/em>their width is approximately half their height. In the \u00abE\u00bb and the \u00abF\u00bb the central stroke is located above the geometric center. They are built by vertical and horizontal strokes.<\/p>\n

\"Parentesco:<\/a><\/p>\n

B, P, R: <\/em>have \u00abloops\u00bb in their structure.<\/p>\n

The \u00abB\u00bb has two, the upper one smaller than the lower one. The upper part has a width equivalent to half its height, the lower part is slightly wider.<\/p>\n

The \u00abP\u00bb and the \u00abR\u00bb have a common structure, with a width which is almost half their width. The \u00abP\u00bb, in this case, has no link between the loop and the stem. This characteristic is not present in every typeface family.<\/p>\n

The tail of the \u00abR\u00bb grants the letter support, the total width is 3\/4 its height.<\/p>\n

\"Parentesco:<\/a><\/p>\n

X, Y, K: <\/em>the encounter of the strokes is held in a medium point.<\/p>\n

In the \u00abX\u00bb and the \u00abK\u00bb this takes place in the optic center, slightly above the geometric one.<\/p>\n

The \u00abK\u00bb has two diagonal strokes, an ascender and a descender, both with similar angles. The upper diagonal stroke reaches a width which is 2\/3 the height, while the lower one is 3\/4 the height.<\/p>\n

The arms of the \u00abY\u00bb come together below the geometric center, allowing the interior counter form to be wider. The angle is similar to that of the \u00abX\u00bb.<\/p>\n

\"Parentesco:<\/a><\/p>\n

H, I, J, T: <\/em>the \u00abI\u00bb works as constructive model of the other three letters.<\/p>\n

The \u00abJ\u00bb extends, in this case, with a soft curve below the baseline, 1\/3 its height. It shares the characteristic of going below the baseline only with the \u00abQ\u00bb.<\/p>\n

The \u00abH\u00bb is solid and stable. The crossbar is located above the geometric center, so that the lower counterform may support the upper one. Its width is approximately \u00be its height.<\/p>\n

The \u00abT\u00bb has the stem as the symmetry axis of the crossbar. Its width is similar to that of the \u00abH\u00bb.<\/p>\n

\"Parentesco:<\/a><\/p>\n

S: <\/em>it is a complex letter. It is formed by a curve and counter-curve with a narrow development. The lower curve derives from a circle which is larger than the upper one, to support it and give it greater back up. It is unstable. Its width is approximately half its height. It shares the type of curves with the rest of the circular signs.<\/p>\n

N: <\/em>it is quite wide, occupying \u00be its height. The diagonal stroke divides the internal counterforms in spaces which are approximately the same, as are the angles. The vortices go beyond the height and the baseline due to optical correction.<\/p>\n

U: <\/em>it is also unstable as it leans on a curve which goes slightly beyond the baseline. Its width is approximately \u00be its height.<\/p>\n

Z: <\/em>It is solid and stable as the supporting arm is a bit longer than the upper arm, with a vortex that goes slightly beyond the case.<\/p>\n

\"Sin<\/a><\/p>\n

Comparing proportions with recently designed alphabets<\/h3>\n

In different typographic designs, structures undergo changes that make each family a distinctive one, but basic characteristics are maintained, to make them recognizable. Deeper structural changes affect the width of signs, the height of capitals, of the x, and of ascenders and descenders.<\/p>\n

As regards style, though this is not our main concern today, changes are produced in the stroke (uniform or with different relations between wide ones and thin ones) and in the terminals (serif if present, and cuts in the strokes, in the sans-serif ones). In the Latin alphabet, to take it as example \u2014Trajan, Carol Twombly, 1989\u2014 we had taken the \u00abO\u00bb to build the container, which based on its width and height was a square. In other cases it will be a rectangle, if the \u00abO\u00bb is higher than wider. <\/p>\n

If we analyze the signs in this other example \u2014Rosario, H. Gatti, 2004\u2014, there are many coincidences with the analyses performed for the Trajans.<\/p>\n

If we take Rosario, and we repeat the procedure of looking for the O container, we will see that it is a vertical rectangle (width\/height proportion: 3\/4). <\/p>\n

When dividing in groups based on differences in width we see that, in general, differences are slighter and the narrow ones are wider. That is to say, there are subtle differences in width and they have to do with the same criteria as those in classic ones. There are two letters where the width is different: the Z, narrower and the S, much wider than its Latin correspondent. The most important difference is that there is less variation in width.<\/p>\n

M and W: <\/em>Are wide, wider than the \u00abO\u00bb<\/p>\n

O and Q: <\/em>have almost the same width.<\/p>\n

C, D and G: <\/em>are slightly narrower than the \u00abO\u00bb or the \u00abQ\u00bb, as in the Traja<\/p>\n

\"Letra<\/a><\/p>\n

\"Grupo<\/a><\/p>\n

H, U, N, T, A, V and Z:<\/em> narrower than the round ones (1\/5 less) and the \u00abZ\u00bb is still a bit narrower.<\/p>\n

B, P, R; E, F, L; K, X, Y; S, N, U, Z; H, I, J, T: <\/em>are narrow, though with differences between each other. \u00abI\u00bb is the narrowest one, K\u00bb and \u00abX\u00bb the widest, just as in Trajans.<\/p>\n

\"Grupos<\/a><\/p>\n

We may conclude that first, analysis has to be performed on each family, because apart from the general, there are differences, and second, though these may not be noticeable, we can recognize relationships in the criteria that determine widths.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Production technology and its influence on shapes. Trajan capitals and their establishment as a model. Basic structures and common width groups. Groups by morphological relation. Historical and contemporary widths.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2559,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[25,19],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/635"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=635"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/635\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2559"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=635"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=635"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oert.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=635"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}