Linguists were producing formatted IPA texts using characters like ɔ, ɑ, æ, ɛ, ə, ŋ, ħ, ʔ and ʃ long before the advent of desktop computers and standardized character sets like Unicode. The key to this was the use of specialized typewriters and, in some cases, clever workarounds.
Here are some of the models and techniques linguists used:
1. Custom-Made or Modified Typewriters:
- Individual Key Modifications: One of the most common approaches was to take a standard typewriter (like an IBM Selectric, which was very popular due to its interchangeable "golf ball" typing elements) and have specific keys modified or replaced. This involved physically altering the type slugs to create the desired IPA symbols. This was often done by skilled technicians or even by linguists themselves with the right tools.
- Interchangeable Typing Elements (Golf Balls/Daisy Wheels): The IBM Selectric was a game-changer because of its interchangeable typing elements. Linguists could purchase or have custom-made golf balls with a range of IPA symbols. Switching between elements allowed them to access a much wider character set than a standard typewriter. This was a significant improvement over earlier typewriters where the keys were fixed.
- Specialized Typewriter Companies: Some companies specialized in producing typewriters for academic and scientific purposes. These might have come with pre-installed IPA keyboards or offered customization services.
2. Overtyping and Manual Insertion:
- Overtyping: For symbols that were variations of existing letters (like a barred 'i' or a tilde over a vowel), linguists would often type the base character and then manually backspace and overtype a diacritic or modification. This required precision and careful alignment.
- Manual Insertion: Some symbols that were difficult or impossible to create with the typewriter were manually drawn in with a pen after the text was typed. This was especially common for more complex or less frequent symbols.
3. Using Existing Symbols Creatively:
- Substitution: In some cases, linguists might use existing typewriter symbols that were close approximations of IPA characters, or use combinations of symbols.
- Diacritics as Separate Characters: Some diacritics (like the tilde for nasalization or the macron for length) might be typed as separate characters and placed above or below the preceding symbol, even if they weren't perfectly aligned.
Specific Examples of Typewriters (While difficult to pinpoint exact models used only by linguists for IPA, these were commonly modified):
- IBM Selectric: As mentioned, the Selectric was a powerhouse in academic settings due to its interchangeable typing elements. This was likely the most widely used platform for creating IPA texts.
- Various Manual and Electric Typewriters: Before the Selectric, linguists would have used other manual and electric typewriters, relying more heavily on modifications and manual insertion.
Challenges and Limitations:
- Limited Character Set: Even with modifications, the number of symbols available on a typewriter was still limited compared to modern digital fonts.
- Alignment Issues: Achieving perfect alignment of diacritics and symbols could be challenging.
- Modification Costs: Customizing typewriters or ordering specialized elements could be expensive.
- Difficulty in Revision: Making changes to a typed text required retyping sections or using correction fluid, which could be messy.
Why this approach worked for its time:
Despite the limitations, these methods were effective because:
- They were the only practical option: Before computers, typewriters were the standard for producing professional documents.
- Linguists were skilled: Linguists were highly skilled at using these tools and techniques to produce legible and accurate texts.
- The community understood the conventions: The linguistic community was accustomed to reading texts produced in this way and could interpret the symbols correctly.
In summary, pre-Unicode IPA texts were created through a combination of specialized typewriters with modified or interchangeable elements, clever manual techniques like overtyping and manual insertion, and a degree of creativity in using available symbols. It was a testament to the ingenuity and dedication of linguists working with the technology of their time.