Daylight character in a space can be defined as the manner in which daylight permeates and is dispersed in that space. The architectural elements related to daylighting under investigation in this study were rooted in Iranian-Isfahani heritage, considered traditional Iranian architecture (from the 16th to early 20th century). The establishment of a classification system for daylighting systems holds significant utility. This study aims to delineate the architectural components present in Isfahani-style structures that facilitate the ingress of daylight, thereby enhancing the indoors.
The methodology employed in this research relies on subjective observation and photographic documentation. Based on the findings of this study, architectural daylighting elements can be organized into four distinct categories: Controllers, Scatterers, Filterers, and Modifiers. This classification system delineated these categories based on the observed order in their complexity (in terms of both quantity and quality of daylight treatment), function (pertaining to lighting, view-out, or shading), material characteristics (including transparency, roughness, and brightness), and their impact on daylighting (such as distribution, colour rendition, and intensity). Daylight Controllers encompassed elements like the hurno (skylight), the ravaq, the sabat, and the tabesh-band/sarsayeh/kharakpoush (shading devices), while daylight Scatterers encompassed the shabak, the rozan, the pachang (windows and doors), and the muqarnas (an ornamental feature of skylight). Daylight Filterers, representing more advanced elements when compared to the previous two categories, included the goljam (windows) and the jam-khaneh (skylights). The most intricate daylight manipulation elements were the daylight Modifiers, exemplified by the orosi (windows) and the roshandan (skylight)

Although formulaic expressions found in earlier correspondence have drawn scholarly attention, their (un)grammaticality has not been thoroughly researched. The present paper thus focuses on the two types of formulae with the verb remain found in private correspondence: one headed by 1st person pronoun (as in: we remain(s) your daughters), the other one starting with but/so/also/and/only (as in: but remain(s) your affectionate child until death). For the purpose of the study a corpus of 19th-century correspondence has been compiled and analyzed; additionally, the data from Dylewski (2013) have been taken into account. Next to the corpus scrutiny, an Internet search has been carried out to verify whether the use of the formulae at issue goes beyond the 19th century. An analysis from both a qualitative and quantitative angles allowed for putting forth a number of hypotheses concerning the origin of variation between -s-marked and unmarked forms as well as their distribution across letter-types and different geographical locations. The results of the analysis also corroborate the claim that -s on remain in the structures under discussion is neither a “part of the authentic local vernacular nor of authentic contemporary standard English, but part of a specifi c, localized practice of letter writing, which had its own linguistic rules” (Pietsch 2015: 226).

The influence of the Vernacular Orthography used in Old Russian birch bark letters on standard book writing in Old Rus’ is traditionally regarded as insignificant, being merely associated with single inclusions. According to our observations, in the 13th century, during the period of the most active use of graphics with a variation of letters о – ъ and е – ь in vernacular writing, this influence in individual handwritings may have been more significant. In the 13th century handwriting of the Gospel from the RGADA collection (manuscript collection, no. 816), the variation of the letters о – ъ and е – ь is represented by hundreds of examples. Their detailed analysis allows us to describe the influential features of Vernacular Orthography on the book spelling system in this period – the normalization mechanisms employed by book scribes to eliminate vernacular effects, along with the most favourable positions for the penetration of these effects into book spelling itself. The article shows that general data on the reflexes of Vernacular Orthography in the manuscript under consideration gloss over the noticeable contrast in the individual positions relevant from the spelling point of view. A more significant influence of the graphic effects е = ь, о = ъ on book spelling occurred in the presence of correlating forms within it, differing in a pair of letters (the flexion of the present tense -еть/-ете, forms of different genders like правъ / право, forms of participle and aorist like падъша / падоша). In some morphemes, the share of vernacular spelling positions in the manuscript may be one third or more than half of all the examples of a given morpheme.

For centuries, the roof has been a reminiscence, the symbol of basic human shelter and territory. Using the example of several ethnic groups living in Southeast Asia, Bhutan and Poland, the basic determinants of roof shape creation in vernacular architecture are discussed and similarities highlighted. In wooden architecture in different regions of the world, the form and construction of the roof are determined primarily by local conditions: climatic conditions, available materials, local tradition, culture, customs. Often it is the shape of the roof that determines the visual identity of a given ethnic group, with its traditions and way of life. The author points out that societies from different regions of the world with no cultural ties created wooden architecture based on the same factors and that the similarities are already present at the level of thinking patterns resulting, for example, from the need to emphasize the importance of religious buildings by means of the stacked, pent hip form of the basic roof.