The latinisation of Greek typographical characters 1 2 The latinisation of Greek typographical characters Design analysis of the phenomenon of latinisation 3 4 AKTO ATHENIAN ARTISTIC & TECHNOLOGICAL GROUP BA (HONOURS) DEGREE IN GRAPHIC DESIGN MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY PART TIME STUDIES TITLE OF DISSERTATION THE LATINISATION OF GREEK TYPOGRAPHICAL CHARACTERS STUDENT NAME TATIANA MARZA TUTOR NAME NIKOS SMYRNIOS 2012 – 2013 DATE OF SUBMISSION MAY 30th, 2013 5 CON TENTS 6 FOREWORD Α INTRODUCTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PHENOMENON OF LATINISATION AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY 4 TOPIC AND METHODOLOGY 6 Β BRIEF HISTORY OF THE GREEK ALPHABET 11 LANDMARKS OF GREEK TYPOGRAPHY 16 THE “SUPERIORITY” OF THE LATIN ALPHABET 24 NOTES ABOUT THE CONCURRENT USE OF TWO WRITING SYSTEMS IN THE SAME TEXT 25 UNIQUE DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GREEK LETTERS IN COMPARISON TO THE LATIN ONES OF THE SAME FONT FAMILY 28 7 Text texture and white space of characters 28 The hidden ligature system of greek typography 32 Upright and italic styles 33 Harmony between uppercase and lowercase characters 36 Serifs vs. entry and exit strokes 36 Readability and legibility 39 Ascenders and descenders 41 Height and width of letters 43 C SURVEY RESULTS 47 SURVEY RESULTS – ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 62 CONCLUSION 70 STUDY CRITIQUE 72 8 EPILOGUE 75 REFERENCES 79 STUDY DIARY 91 APPENDIX Α: History of the Greek and Latin alphabets 97 Β: Cyrillic alphabet 135 C (Γ): Brief history of Greek typography, 15th – 21st centuries 141 D (Δ): Questionnaire 187 Ε: Linguistic frequency of letters 193 F (ΣΤ): Experiment: text texture 197 G (Ζ): Typographic design proposals for Greek fonts 201 9 10 J FOREWORD 11 During my Graphic Design studies at AKTO, professors Lefteris Kontogiannis and Yiannis Charalambopoulos were stressing what an interesting domain typography is. After reading Robert Bringhurst's book "The Elements of Typographic Style", I realized how true their airmation was. This systematic study of typography should be included in all graphic design curricula. Later, when I started my irst professional eforts, I was confronted with the relatively limited choice of Greek fonts. Investigating a little more this ield, I discovered the existence of the phenomenon of Latinisation. This piqued my curiosity, as it was a term without a clear interpretation, even though it was mentioned everywhere. So I decided to study this phenomenon. My initial lack of basic knowledge of typography proved to be no obstacle to this study, as many members of the world– wide typographic community guided me with great enthusiasm. Not only that, but many proceeded to new indings through the online forum which was launched. The experience was so exciting that I often wished the dissertation would not end. 12 Acknowledgements First of all, I must express my gratitude to the type designers who were so willing to introduce me to the secrets of Greek typography. Without their contribution to the internet forum discussions this study would not have been possible. I would like to thank Christopher T. Dean, Herbert Elbrecht, Craig Eliason, Charles Ellertson, Tom Gewecke, Brian Jongseong Park, Albert Jan Pool, John Savard, Yulia Tigina, Jürgen Weltin, Ilya Zakharevich and Panos Vassiliou. In the text that follows, one can witness the great philosophical and scientiic minds of John Hudson and Nick Shinn, who contributed decisively in the clariication of this issue. Furthermore, particular mention should be made to the exceptionally perceptive, yet practical approach of Hrant Papazian, as well as, to the insightful comments of Chris Lozos. I warmly thank Andreas Stötzner for his advice on typesetting and his friendly support during the writing of this study. The correspondence with Robert Bringhurst and Klimis Mastoridis were a great pleasure and invaluable, as was the help in translating the typographical terms which I owe to Giorgos Matthiopoulos. For the initial guidance on the issue of Latinisation, but also for their comments for the preparation of the questionnaire I appreciate the help of Gerry Leonidas and Christina Lagogianni. The Greek text was edited by my dear teacher, Fannie Valsamaki, who taught me Greek 13 years ago. I warmly thank Professor Nick Smyrnios for the overall guidance and supervision throughout the course of this research. Finally, people who supported me throughout this entire effort are my husband, Stamatis Ioannidis, who helped in drafting of the texts, Nicoleta Martini, Afroditi Chantzaridou and, in his own way, my son, Jason. 13 14 PART A 15 d TOPIC AND METHODOLOGY In the context of the global cultural dominance of the English language, there is a tendency for non-Latin fonts to be assimilated by the Latin rules of typographic design. This phenomenon has been called “latinisation” – though no set deinition is available, nor has there been a rigorous study of it, especially for Greek. The aims of this study were: 1. To formally deine the term “latinisation” 2. To identify the unique characteristics of Greek typographic elements in relation to the phenomenon 3. To identify possible causes for latinisation from a design perspective 4. To survey the Greek visual communication community’s stance in regards to the phenomenon. Initially, a bibliographical inquiry into the evolution of the Greek and Latin alphabets was conducted. This was further detailed for the respective typographic elements. The deining features of Greek fonts, inherent through their design process, could not be identiied conclusively, though. So, as a form of action research, a forum was established within the internet site, Typophile, where most prominent font designers participate. Through the discussion that ensued, it was possible to answer the irst three aims of the study. For the fourth aim of the study, a questionnaire was formulated concerning the typographical needs of the Greek visual communication community, along with their attitude towards latinisation. This was based on both relevant indings from the bibliography, and conclusions that were reached within the internet forum. So, a survey was conducted with the distribution of this questionnaire to Greek and Cypriot graphic design and type setting professionals. Graphic designers were selected for having been recognised in local or international competitions. Newspaper type setters were selected for working for the most widely circulating newspapers. Book type setters of all publishing companies in the two countries were contacted. 16 6 17 46 PART C 47 d SURVEY RESULTS Number of questionnaires – by category and total 48 49 Thirty two (32 – 74%) out of forty three (43) respondents were men and eleven (11 – 26%) were women. Their age ranged between 26 and 62 years, with an average of 38 ± 8. Men were on average 39 ± 8 years old, while women were 35 ± 6 years old. Answers and aggregated data per question 1 The most commonly used Greek fonts are, in descending order (three answers per participant): Din Text Pro Helvetica Myriad Pro CF Din Minion Pro Times New Roman BT Imperial GFS Didot Gotham Greek Neutraface Greek Family PF Catalogue Fedra Serif Futura Garamond Premier Pro PF Din Text Pro Arial Fedra Sans PF Beau Sans Pro PF Centro Sans Pro Cannibal family Meta/Meta Pro 50 8 7 7 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 The following fonts were mentioned once: Blast Gothic CF, Calibri, CF Helvetica, Compacta CF Greek, Courier New, Farnham FB, Fedra, Fedra Sans Pro, Fedra Serif A, Franklin Gothic ITS Hellenic, Georgia, GFS Artemisia, GFS Elpis, Gill Sans, Helvetica Neue, KP family, Mg Old Times, Metamoderna, New Gothic, Oicina Sans ITC Hellenic, P22 Underground, PF Agora Sans Pro, PF Akzidenz, PF Encore Pro, PF Highway, PF Libera Pro, Proxima Nova, SK Alexander Old Style, Stag Greek, Times, Warnock Pro, Papyrus, Quad, και Trade. Degree of satisfaction with the existing Greek fonts: not at all 5% very much 16% slightly 30% moderately 49% Two (2) answered “not at all”, thirteen (13) answered “slightly”, twenty one (21) answered “moderately”, seven (7) answered “very much”, none (0) answered “completely”. 51 2 3 Percent use of display vs. text fonts: display fonts text fonts 4 31 % 69 % Desired Greek font style: The question was answered by thirty seven (37) participants, so the given percentages are in reference to this number. More than one answer by each participant was allowed. modern elegant classic austere 17 16 5 4 43 % 46 % 14 % 11 % Three would wish for a playful style, although another one suggests that the internet provides many such fonts. Two want calligraphic fonts: One, classic handwritten and the other, inscriptional handwritten style. One wishes for a children's / youth style, another for fonts for dyslexics and one "retro" with a 60's & 80's style. 5 Newly designed Greek fonts should be on average: serif sans serif 52 45 % 55 % Degree of significance of polytonic support for a Greek font: 6 not at all 7% completely 23% slightly 21% very much 14% moderately 35% Three (3) answered “not at all”, nine (9) answered “slightly”, ifteen (15) answered “moderately”, six (6) answered “very much”, ten (10) answered “completely”. 53 7 Degree of significance of italic and upright style differentiation: slightly 5% completely 28% moderately 21% very much 47% None (0) answered “not at all”, two (2) answered “slightly”, nine (9) answered “moderately”, twenty (20) answered “very much”, twelve (12) answered “completely”. 8 Additional desirable Greek font features (More than one answer allowed per participant.): 54 DESIGN FEATURE NUMBER* * Expresses the frequency each feature was mentioned by all participants ** Represents the percentage of participants who mentioned the specific feature The following design features were mentioned once: book, ultra bold, ultra, extra black, ultra black, heavy, medium, light, ultra light, bold italics, black italics, condensed, drop caps, case sensitive forms, monospaced font, glyphs, dingbats & leurons, asterisks, greek kai (ϗ), igures, lining igures, numerics, math font, math symbols, new numbers, old style numbers, proportional old style igures, tabular igures, linear & tabular support; and one (1) mentioned “additional features are not signiicant”. 55 9 Elements that provide a Greek "personality" to a font: Only twenty nine (29) participants answered the question, so the presented percentages have 29 as the denominator. More than one answer per participant was allowed. Fourteen (14 – 48%) believe that the particularities of certain Greek letters give hellenic character to a font. Below are the groups of letters identiied as such: Groups of typographic characters identiied as providing Greek character to a font Two (2 – 7%) consider that ascenders and descenders are the elements which characterize Greek fonts. Three (3) of the initial fourteen (14) think that hellenic character is provided by the roundness of α, ε, ο and the narrow ι or the descenders of ζ, ς, and γ with counter; and of ς, γ, χ, ψ, φ. Some of these 14 participants mentioned as characteristic the peculiarities of capital letters in general, with one mentioning Ω, Ξ, Φ, Α, Ψ in particular. Other features mentioned were: Tradition, simplicity, stroke contrast, lines of diferent thickness, and the lack of roundness in characters of “older literature”. 56 Five (5 – 17%) stated that a manuscript style lends hellenic character to a font, and ive (5 – 17%) the presence of serifs. Three (3 – 10%) believe that the ancient Greek and the geometric engraving style provide hellenic character to a font, while two (2 – 7%) think this is accomplished by punctuation and accents. Finally, two (2 – 7%, none a type designer) assert that knowledge of the Greek language is a prerequisite for designing Greek fonts. TYPOGRAPHIC CHARACTER FREQUENCY MENTIONED Typographical characters regarded as providing Greek character to a font, by descending frequency. 57 10 Degree to which a handwritten style is necessary to preserve the hellenic character of a font: very much 19% not at all 32% moderately 19% slightly 30% Fourteen (14) answered “not at all”, thirteen (13) answered “slightly”, eight (8) answered “moderately”, eight (8) answered “very much”, none (0) answered “completely”. 58 Degree of desired similarity between kin form Latin and Greek letters of the same typeface family: 11 completely 7% very much 7% not at all 32.5% moderately 21% slightly 32.5% Fourteen (14) answered “not at all”, fourteen (14) answered “slightly”, nine (9) answered “moderately”, three (3) answered “very much”, three (3) answered “completely”. 59 12 Degree of aversion towards the Latinisation of Greek fonts: not at all 9% completely 28% slightly 28% very much 16% moderately 19% Four (4) answered “not at all”, twelve (12) answered “slightly”, eight (8) answered “moderately”, seven (7) answered “very much”, twelve (12) answered “completely”. 60 Characteristics which make a Greek font modern: Twenty eight (28) participants answered the question, so the presented percentages have 28 as the denominator. More than one answer was allowed by each participant. same as in a non-Greek font / current trends simple design nontraditional having alternative characters non-manuscript style Open Τype possibilities 11 7 3 2 2 2 39 % 25 % 11 % 7% 7% 7% The following characteristics were mentioned once: latinisation, kerning, discreet serifs, absence of serifs, readability, roundness of letters but softer curves, presence of alternative phonemes [sic], ligatures, small caps, additional applications (e.g. small caps), interplay with other arts (e.g. architecture), web choices. 61 13 d SURVEY RESULTS – ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION For the statistical analysis of the questionnaire, answers were assigned the following numbers: Not at all – 1 Slightly – 2 Moderately – 3 Very much – 4 Completely – 5 The mean answer and standard deviation for each question was reported. Standard deviations signiicantly smaller than 1 indicate little variability in the responses given, while signiicantly greater than 1 imply great variation. 1 Concerning the Greek fonts most often used by the participants: Of the total number of ifty ive (55) reported fonts, forty nine (49) could be identiied, while for six (6) it was not possible to determine whether a Greek version exists. Thirteen (13) carry an exclusively Greek designer signature. Twenty one (21) were originally designed in Latin by non–Greeks, while the Greek version was designed either entirely or with the participation of Greek designers. For ifteen (15) fonts no Greek designer participation could be determined. 62 BY GREEK DESIGNERS Blast Gothic CF GFS Artemisia GFS Elpis Metamoderna PF Agora Sans Pro PF Encore Pro PF Highway PF Libera Pro PF Beau Sans Pro PF Centro Sans Pro GFS Didot CF Din PF Catalogue FREQUENCY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 5 4 GREEK PARTICIPATION IN DESIGN Calibri Compacta CF Greek Farnham FB Fedra Fedra Sans Pro Fedra Serif A Franklin Gothic ITS Hellenic Gill Sans Oicina Sans ITC Hellenic PF Akzidenz Stag Greek Warnock Pro Fedra Sans Fedra Serif Garamond Premier Pro PF Din Text Pro Gotham Greek Neutraface Greek Family Minion Pro Myriad Pro Din Text Pro 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 4 4 5 7 8 63 BY FOREIGN DESIGNERS CF Helvetica Courier New Georgia Helvetica Neue KP family Mg Old Times New Gothic P22 Underground Proxima Nova SK Alexander Old Style Times Arial family BT Imperial (beatstream) Times New Roman Helvetica FREQUENCY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 5 7 UNDETERMINED EXISTENCE OF GREEK VERSION Futura Papyrus Quad Trade Cannibal family Meta/Meta Pro 3 1 1 1 2 2 Sixty nine percent (69%) of the fonts mentioned were either entirely or partially designed by Greeks. This underscores the signiicant involvement of Greeks in designing Greek fonts. The large number of fonts mentioned along with the absence of a universally accepted system prevented their categorization. Their listing may help the interested observer to reach draft conclusions through a cursory approach. 64 Concerning the degree of satisfaction with currently available Greek typefaces: 2 Fifteen (15 – 35%) answered not at all or slightly, while twentyeight (28 – 65%) answered moderately or very much. The average was 2.8 ± 0.8 (relatively small deviation). Most (65%) of the participants do not seem to have a serious problem with the existing Greek fonts. On the other hand, the average of less than 3, the fact that the most common response (21) was "moderately" and the lack of any response of "completely satisied", suggest a covered need for even more suitable Greek fonts. Concerning the usage of display and text fonts: 3 The ratio 70 (text) – 30 (display) reported underscores the users' need for text fonts. On the other hand, a percentage of 30% for display fonts is not negligible. Concerning the category of Greek font styles which the participants would like to be more available: 4 Almost half (46%) of the respondents to this question would like new, modern fonts. An elegant style was desired by 43%, while this was combined with the modern by seven (44% of the answers "elegant"), and with the classic style by two (13% of the answers "elegant"). The wide variability of the participants' projects cannot be better expressed by the wide range of responses that included: epigraphic manuscript style, children's / youthful style, "retro" of decades '60 – '80 style, and font for dyslexics. Concerning the desirability of serif vs. sans serif for new Greek fonts: The average responses of 55% ± 14 for sans serif vs. 45% ± 14 for serif typefaces show a tendency to move away from serif. On the other hand, the diference is small and statistically rather weak. 65 5 6 Concerning the desirability of polytonic support: There were thirty–one (31 – 72%) airmative responses ("moderately" to "completely") and twelve (12 – 28%) negative responses ("not at all" and "slightly"). The average was 3.3 ± 1.2. It is thus evident that, by a wide margin, the majority are in favour of polytonic support, while a signiicant portion has no regard for it. This conclusion holds true even if the ive (5) publishers are excluded from the calculations, since then the new relationship becomes 71% for and 29% against the polytonic support. The publishers, as expected, responded mostly positively (3 replied "completely" and only 1 "slightly"). 7 Concerning the degree of desire for noticeably different upright and italic styles: The average response was 4 ± 0.8, corresponding to "very much". The fact that no one responded "not at all" while 95% answered "enough" to "absolutely" underscores the high signiicance the participants attribute to the upright/italic system. 8 Concerning other characteristics which would be desirable in a Greek font: Thirty seven percent (37%) of the participants answered that they would like Greek fonts to have as many features as possible – similar to Latin fonts. This is further supported by the multitude of speciic responses which ranged from mathematical terms to symbols and glyphs. Features that statistically stood out were true small caps (35%) and bold letters (bold 46% – aggregating categories). 9 Concerning the elements which attribute hellenic character to a font: If one were to remove the responses about capital letters and the archaic qoppa & stigma from the 14 responses about spe66 ciic Greek letters that provide "greekness" to a font, 12 answers would remain where all the letters mentioned are curved and/or with ascenders – descenders and/or with prominent entry – exit strokes. As all of these are elements of the hellenic manuscript heritage, as described in Part A, it would be safe to conclude that there is a subconscious recognition by those participants that this manuscript heritage is Greek deining. Furthermore, ascenders/descenders, stroke contrast, the existence of serifs, lines of diferent thickness were explicitly mentioned by others – all of which constitute manuscript style elements. Overall, twenty six (26 – 90%) responses to this question support the assertion that some form of manuscript style gives hellenic character to a Greek font. Concerning the degree to which a manuscript style is necessary for a Greek font to be perceived as Greek: Twenty seven (27 – 63%) responded negatively with almost equal number of "not at all" and "slightly". Only sixteen (16 – 37%) responded positively, with an equal number of "enough" and "very much". None responded "absolutely." The average was 2.0 ± 1.1, corresponding to "slightly". This is in apparent contradiction to the indings of the previous question. This can not be attributed to the lack of an answer to question 9 by fourteen (14) participants. If these 14 are excluded from the analysis, the ratios of answers to question 10 are basically preserved, as 62% are negative and 38% are positive. A possible explanation could be that the speciic examples presented in the questionnaire prompted the participants to provide negative responses (negative bias). If one assumes that the 46% of the respondents who desire trendy/modern fonts (answer to question 4) actually want plain designs, then one can safely deduce that the depicted examples were seen as excessively elaborate. A more likely explanation, however, is that most participants who answered thus, have subconsciously assimilated this view, since the complex system of ligatures in greek typography is hidden (see Part A). 67 10 11 Concerning the degree to which kin form Greek and Latin letters should be the same in a typeface family: Twenty-eight (28 – 65%) responded negatively with an equal number of "not at all" and "slightly." Fifteen (15 – 35%) responded positively. Most (nine – 9) answered "enough" and three (3) "absolutely." The average is 2.0 ± 1.1 which corresponds to "slightly." 12 Concerning the degree of aversion towards the phenomenon of Latinisation: Twenty seven (27 – 63%) responded positively, mostly "absolutely" (12 replies). On the other hand, sixteen (16/37%) responded negatively. The average was 3.3 ± 1.4. The average participant, therefore, tends to dislike the phenomenon of Latinisation (albeit with a large standard deviation). This is consistent with the negative, on average, answer to question 11. On the other hand, if the participants are grouped according to the combination of their responses to questions 11 & 12, the following subcategories emerge: Α Β C D Kin letters should be diferent / latinisation disturbs 20 Kin letters should be similar / latinisation does not disturb 8 Kin letters should be diferent / latinisation does not disturb 8 Kin letters should be similar / latinisation disturbs 7 Subcategory A is clearly against Latinisation and in favour of preserving the special character of Greek letters. Similarly, subcategory B is clearly tolerant of Latinisation and does not seem to have objections to the assimilation of Greek fonts by their Latin counterparts. Subcategories C & D, on the other hand, seem to be self–contradicting. Possible causes could be the misinterpretation of the questions, or the contradiction between the participants' aesthetic and ideological criteria (i.e. modernist aesthetics vs. national pride). 68 Concerning the elements that attribute a modern style to a Greek font: If an attempt is made to lump responses regardless of technical characteristics, then 57% of respondents who answered question 13 think that "being similar to foreign fonts/following current trends/ avoiding tradition/associating with other arts" is the answer. If lumping is done according to technical/aesthetic characteristics, the largest group is that of the eight participants (8/29%) who think that "being neat/having no manuscript style/being Latinised/having discreet or non–existent serifs/having mild curvature" provides a modern character to a Greek font. 69 13 d CONCLUSION A Conclusions regarding the technical characteristics of latinisation. 1. Definition of Latinisation. Latinisation can be deined as "the importation or favouring of shapes and features from Latin typography into non-Latin script design" (Hudson, 2013, March 22, page 2, 10:30). Usually, characteristics that migrate are "serif structures, stroke contrast & stress, modularity, etc." (Papazian 2004, p. 13). Finally, there may be a complete replacement of non-Latin letters by Latin ones. 2. Design features of latinised Greek fonts. Latinisation of Greek typographic elements may occur in varying ways and degrees when an alteration of the hellenic character of letters and texts takes place singly or in combination. This hellenic character is determined by the high linguistic frequency of round letters as well as the heritage of manuscript features such as curvature, cursive internal construction, and the ascenders & descenders of Greek letters. 3. Possible reasons for the latinisation of Greek fonts based on design. 8. To what extent these changes improve the readability & legibility of the text is unclear. Depending on the use intended, latinisation may be an attempt to reach the concise appearance of the Latin text. The aim of a more uniform tone of grey could be achieved by minimizing the letter counter and the vertical dimension of ascenders and descenders of letters. If the purpose entails the avoidance of the inherent cursive structure of Greek letters, entry and exist strokes will be minimised. Moreover, the proportions of letters may be assimilated relative to the Latin, to serve the geometric requirements of the speciic text.8 70 Conclusions from the survey of the Greek – speaking visual communication community, regarding the phenomenon of Latinisation. The irst conclusion that emerges from this survey is that, although in general the participants are fairly satisied with the existing Greek fonts, there is a signiicant need for a wide variety of new, mostly modern fonts. Participants want, in general, all features of a Latin font (e.g. small caps, a noticeable diference between upright and italic styles, etc.), as well as polytonic system support. Both text and display fonts are desirable. Furthermore, whether conscious or not, there appears to be a recognition of the hidden manuscriptal elements of typography as Greek deining (responses to question 9). Therefore, it is implied that most participants wish for the respect of these elements. This is reinforced by an intolerance towards the substitution of Greek letters by similar Latin ones and resentment towards the phenomenon of Latinisation by most participants (responses to questions 11 & 12). Meanwhile, answers regarding the desired font style, the necessity of the manuscript style and the elements of a modern Greek style (responses to questions 4, 10 & 13) express a desire to move away from the Byzantine manuscriptal writing roots, and a will to converge with modern, international trends. In a sense, these two poles deine the continuum within which most participants would like new Greek fonts to fall. They would have to be modern and "cosmopolitan", yet, without losing the Greek particularities. On the other hand, one has to point out the existence of a signiicant number of participants (19%), who clearly and consciously support the merging of Greek and Latin design standards. For them, designers are free to follow international models, without being concerned about Greek particularities. 71 B d STUDY CRITIQUE It should be acknowledged from the start that the indings of the bibliographical comparative study (books, articles and online forum) are not empirically documented. Instead, they rely on expert opinion on the subject. Besides, while a great number of experts expressed their views in the online forum, there may be some who haven't participated and whose views have not been taken into consideration. Furthermore, with further systematic study of the phenomenon, it is possible that substantially more technical factors will be identiied concerning the issue of Latinisation of Greek typographic characters. Regarding the empirical part of this research, it is obvious that the sample of those who received the questionnaire is rather small compared to the total number of people that work with typographical settings. Even though the sample consists of probably the most distinguished members of the studied population, it can not represent the whole of it. We do not, for example, know the commercial sign manufacturers' position on the issue. Moreover, only 11% of those who received the questionnaire answered it. Even smaller was the number who answered all questions. Thus, the results of this study should be considered as indicative of trends, and not conclusive evidence. Other tenuous points that have to be mentioned are the use of the word "enough" and the presentation of particular calligraphic examples in the questionnaire. The word "enough" has a rather positive conceptual connotation and for this reason it was included in the analysis of results as a positive response. The questionnaire's structure would have been better served by a more neutral term. On the other hand, the particular illustrations of calligraphic typography included in the questionnaire may have biased some responses, depending on how much the participants liked or disliked the speciic examples. Nevertheless, this essay is the irst, as far as is known, systematic study of the phenomenon of Latinisation of Greek typographic characters and its technical design parameters. It is also, the irst attempt to explore directly the opinions and needs of Greek font end–users regarding this issue. 72 73 74 � EPILOGUE 75 In conclusion, it appears that the phenomenon of Latinisation is very common in modern Greek typography. This phenomenon may occur in varying ways and diferent degrees when the hellenic character of letters is altered, the latter being determined by the high linguistic frequency of round letters and the heritage of manuscript features. Besides the general context of Western cultural dominance, speciic design incentives for Latinisation, depending on the use, may spring from a wish to reach the same tone of grey as in the Latin text, and to avoid the inherited, internal cursive construction of Greek letters. Knowledge of this enables graphic designers, text typesetters and young type designers to be more aware, but also more purposeful in their choices. As far as users of typefaces in Greek-speaking countries are concerned, they seem to be quite satisied by the existing Greek fonts. At the same time, though, they seem to express a signiicant need for a wide variety of new, mostly modern fonts, with all the features Latin fonts have. Furthermore, most of them appear to respect the particularities of the Greek alphabet, but, at the same time, seem to desire the convergence of Greek typography with modern, international design trends. Conversely, there is a signiicant minority that unequivocally supports latinisation. Thus, considering the preferences and needs of end-users of Greek fonts, type designers can direct their eforts with greater freedom and more focus to their new targets. Finally, it can be safely stated that the relationship between alphabets of the same font family is determined by the type designers themselves, depending on the purpose and the style of the font. There is no universal rule on how to achieve harmony and concurrently maintain the authenticity of every writing system (Papazian 2004, p. 16). "To take the notion of harmony back to its musical origins, it is possible for the two voices to produce beautiful harmony without one trying to sound like the other" (Hudson, 2013, 14 March p. 1, 4:20). Something similar might be true for fonts. 76 Suggestions for future research Throughout the research period, it was evident that there is a fundamental lack of a Greek dictionary of international and Greek typographical terms. Furthermore, as already mentioned in the methodology section, it is necessary to conduct a more extensive and thorough study about the needs and attitudes of the Greek design community regarding the latinisation phenomenon. Finally, it would be interesting to study the applied design answers already given and those that will be given in the future by the design community and the society as a whole, upon the issue of latinisation. 9 77 9. For some examples, see Annex Ζ. 78 G REFERENCES 79 Books Ματθιόπουλος, Γ.Δ. 2009. “Ανθολόγιο Εηνικής Τυπογραφίας. Συνοπτική ιστορία της τέχνης του έντυπου εηνικού βιβλίου από τον 15ο έως τον 20ο αιώνα”. Ηράκλειο: Πανεπιστημιακές Εκδόσεις Κρήτης Σιγάλας, Α. 1974. “Ιστορία της εηνικής γραφής”. Β’ έκδ. Θεσσαλονίκη: Κέντρον Βυζαντινών Ερευνών Bringhurst, R. 2008. “Στοιχεία της τυπογραφικής τέχνης”. Mετάφραση Ματθιόπουλος Γ. Δ., Β’ έκδ. Ηράκλειο: Πανεπιστημιακές εκδόσεις Κρήτης Gill, E. (1988). “An Essay on Typography”. London: Lung Humphrey, Limited. McLean, R. 1980. “The Thames and Hudson manual of Typography” Print on Demand Edition. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd. Online books Κατσουλίδης, Τ. 1998. “Η φυσιογνωμία του εηνικού τυπογραφικού γράμματος” p. 175–184. Μακράκης, Κ.Σ. (εκδ.) “Τα εηνικά γράμματα: από την σκληρή πέτρα στον σκληρό δίσκο”. Εταιρεία Εηνικών Τυπογραφικών Στοιχείων. Entire text [online] [accessed 8/2/2013] http://greekfontsociety.gr/images/greektablets/TakisKatsoul.pdf Μακράκης, Κ.Σ. (εκδ.) 1998. “Τα εηνικά γράμματα: από την σκληρή πέτρα στον σκληρό δίσκο”. Αθήνα: Εταιρεία Εηνικών Τυπογραφικών Στοιχείων. Entire text [online] [accessed 8/2/2013] http://greekfontsociety.gr/pages/gr_publications1997. html Carter, M. 1998. “Ποιοι ήρθαν πρώτοι; Οι Έηνες ή οι Ρωμαίοι;” p. 197–210. Μακράκης, Κ.Σ. (εκδ.) “Τα εηνικά γράμματα: από την σκληρή πέτρα στον σκληρό δίσκο”. Αθήνα: Εταιρεία Εηνικών Τυπογραφικών Στοιχείων. Entire text [online] [accessed 13/2/2013] http://www.greekfontsociety.gr/images/greektablets/MatthewCarter.pdf Zapf, H. 1998. “Η εξέλιξη των εηνικών γραμματοσειρών” 80 p. 3–32. Μακράκης, Κ.Σ. (εκδ.) “Τα εηνικά γράμματα: από την σκληρή πέτρα στον σκληρό δίσκο”. Εταιρεία Εηνικών Τυπογραφικών Στοιχείων. Entire text [online] [accessed 8/2/2013] http://greekfontsociety.gr/images/greektablets/HermannZapf.pdf Periodical articles Μαστορίδης, Κ. 2006. “Χάραξη και χύτευση των εηνικών τυπογραφικών στοιχείων στον 19 ο και 20ο αιώνα”. Εηνική επανέκδοση ΗΥΦΕΝ 6, p. 49–110 Papazian, H. H. 2004. “Latinization: prevention and cure”. Spatium Magazin für Typograie 4, p. 10–20 Online articles Leonidas, G. 2000. “Greek fonts and cultural identity” Entire text [online] p. n/a [accessed 8/2/2013] http://leonidas.org/greek-type-design/greek-fonts-andcultural-identity/ Leonidas, G. 2002. “A primer for Greek type design” Entire text [online] p. n/a [accessed 8/2/2013] http://leonidas.org/greek-type-design/a-primer-forgreek-type-design/ Leonidas, G. 2005. “Greek Script: A History by Gerry Leonidas” Entire text [online] p. n/a [accessed 21/1/2013] http://typophile.com/node/14789 Mastoridis, K. [1994] 1999. “The loneliness of Greek typography; myth or reality?” Hyphen 1Β, p. 79–86 Entire text [online] [accessed 10/1/2013] http://afroditi.uom.gr/uompress/pdf/greek_typography.pdf 81 Web sites Berkson, W. 2/11/2010. “Reviving Caslon – Part 2: Readability, Afability, Authority” p. n/a [online] [accessed 20/4/2013] http://ilovetypography.com/2010/11/02/reviving-caslonpart-2-readability-afability-authority/ Boardley, J. 2010. “The origins of abc – Where does our alphabet come from?” p. n/a [online] [accessed 31/1/2013] http://ilovetypography.com/2010/08/07/where-doesthe-alphabet-come-from/ Farley, J. 29/1/2010. “Typography: Readability & Legibility (Part 2)” p. n/a [online] [accessed 20/4/2013] http://www.sitepoint.com/typography-readability-legibility-part-2/ Mullis, C. 2006. “Typography - Legibility & Readability” p. n/a [online] [accessed 20/4/2013] http://www.mightyfinegraphics.com/cg/typography. html Forum comments Enneson, P. (screen name: enne_son) (2005). Re: “Cartesian Area” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http:// typophile.com/node/16454 Hudson, J. (screen name: John Hudson) (2004). Re: “Help on dissertation, Legibility versus readability” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/ node/8049 Hudson, J. (screen name: John Hudson) (2013). Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/node/101331 Lozos, C. (screen name: dezcom) (2013). Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/ node/101331 Marza, T. (screen name: Tatiana Marza) (2013). “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online 82 posted forum]. Papazian, H. (screen name: hrant) (2013). Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/ node/101331 Savard, J. (screen name: quadibloc) (2013). Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/ node/101331 Shinn, N. (screen name: Nick Shinn) (2013). Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/ node/101331 Stötzner, Α. (screen name: Andreas Stötzner) (2013). Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/node/101331 Tigina, Y. (screen name: Yulia) (2013). Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/ node/101331 Vassiliou, P. (screen name: panos vassiliou) (2013). Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/node/101331 Weltin, J. (screen name: J Weltin) (2013). Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/ node/101331 Online interviews Κατσουλίδης, Τ. 2010. “Το σχέδιο του γράμματος” Interview [online] [accessed 12/1/2013] http://vimeo.com/17772878 Personal email Papazian, H. H. (2013). Email sent to Tatiana Marza, 16th March and 21st April. 83 Images images 4, 5 – Κατσουλίδης, Τ. 1998. “Η φυσιογνωμία του ελληνικού τυπογραφικού γράμματος”, p. 178, 179. Μακράκης, Κ.Σ. (εκδ.) “Τα εηνικά γράμματα: από την σκληρή πέτρα στον σκληρό δίσκο”. Εταιρεία Εηνικών Τυπογραφικών Στοιχείων. Entire text [online] [accessed 8/2/2013] <http://greekfontsociety.gr/images/greektablets/TakisKatsoul.pdf> image 6 – Papazian, H. H. 2004. “Latinization: prevention and cure”. Spatium Magazin für Typograie, 4, p. 12 images 7, 8, 9 – Στάικος, Κ. 2002. “Χάρτα της Εηνικής Τυπογραφίας” Β’ έκδ. Τόμος Α’ p. 117, 119, 328. Αθήνα: Εκδόσεις Κότινος Α.Ε. image 10 – Bringhurst, R. 2008. “Στοιχεία της τυπογραφικής τέχνης”. Mετάφραση Ματθιόπουλος Γ. Δ., Β’ έκδ. p. 163. Ηράκλειο: Πανεπιστημιακές εκδόσεις Κρήτης image 12 – Ματθιόπουλος, Γ. Δ. 2009. “Ανθολόγιο Εηνικής Τυπογραφίας. Συνοπτική ιστορία της τέχνης του έντυπου εηνικού βιβλίου από τον 15ο έως τον 20ο αιώνα”, p. 137. Ηράκλειο: Πανεπιστημιακές Εκδόσεις Κρήτης image 21 – Hudson, J. (screen name: John Hudson) March 20, 2013, page 2. Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/node/101331 image 25 – Vassiliou, P. (screen name: panos vassiliou) April 24, 2013, page 5. Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/node/101331 image 27 – Hudson, J. March 20, 2013, page 2. Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/node/101331 image 29 – Vassiliou, P. (screen name: panos vassiliou) April 24, 2013, page 5. Re: “Questionnaire about the needs of Greek typography end-users” [Online forum comment]. Retrieved from http://typophile.com/node/101331 84 image 36 – Papazian, H.H. 2004. “Latinization: prevention and cure”. Spatium Magazin für Typograie, 4, p. 19 85 86 D QUESTIONNAIRE 87 ΑΚΤΟ ATHENIAN ARTISTIC & TECHNOLOGICAL GROUP BA (HONOURS) DEGREE IN GRAPHIC DESIGN MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY __________________________ GREEK TYPOGRAPHY TODAY QUESTIONNAIRE AS PART OF RESEARCH WORK __________________________ STUDENT TATIANA MARZA marzatatiana@gmail.com __________________________ 2013, APRIL In everyday practice, modern Greek type setters are facing a relatively limited choice of Greek fonts. The aim of this study is to identify the needs of users of Greek fonts, so as to assist in their further development. The survey results will be sent to participants by the end of June, 2013. Individual participant information and personal data will remain anonymous. _______________________________________________ Please provide the following: Age: Gender: Employment: (e.g. brand identity developer, package designer, web designer, creative director) _______________________________________________ 88 188 1. Mention the three Greek fonts that you most often use: 2. Are you satisied with the Greek fonts currently available? 1 2 3 4 not at all slightly moderately very much 5 completely 3. What percentage of display vs. text fonts are you using in your work? display % text % 4. Fonts may have a particular style (e.g. classic, modern, austere, playful, elegant, etc.). What style of Greek font would you like to be more available? 5. Which percentage would you prefer newly designed Greek fonts to be? serif % sans serif % 6. Regardless of whether or not you use a polytonic font, how signiicant is the polytonic support for a font? 1 2 3 4 not at all slightly moderately very much 5 completely 7. How important is the noticeable diference between italic and regular styles? 1 2 3 4 5 not at all slightly moderately very much completely 8. What other features would you like a Greek font to have? (e.g. extra weights (state which), true small caps, true superior letters, etc.) 189 89 9. Which elements, in your opinion, give Greek character to a font? 10. To what extent do you think that a font needs to have a manuscript style to maintain its Greek character (e.g. below)? 1 not at all 2 slightly 3 moderately 4 very much 5 completely 11. In a font family that includes the Latin and Greek alphabets, to what extent do you think that letters with similar forms should be the same (e.g. “n - η”, “v - ν”)? 1 not at all 2 slightly 3 moderately 4 very much 5 completely 12. When the design of a Greek font is based on the Latin alphabet, the phenomenon of latinisation may occur: (the irst letter is Latin and the corresponding, Greek) i = ι n /εn/ = n /ήτα/ u ~ υ v /u:/ = ν /νι/ x ~ χ Does the phenomenon of latinisation of Greek fonts disturb you? 1 2 3 4 5 not at all slightly moderately very much completely 190 90 13. What makes a Greek font modern? Thank you very much for your participation and time. For more information, do not hesitate to contact me. 191 91 92 93 94 ❩ The Greek and English texts are set in Andron Corpus (11/13), the captions – in Lapidaria (9/13) and the embellishments are Andron Ornamente, all designed by Andreas Stötzner. 95