Print

Print


G. van der Vegt skrev:
> 2009/5/6 Benct Philip Jonsson <[log in to unmask]>:
>> On 2009-05-06 Philip Newton wrote:
>>> What you could do is what is, apparently, common on Irish
>>>  signs: they use a dotless i. This nicely distinguishes 1
>>> and í, with the latter being unambiguously accented.
>>>
>> That's usual in Icelandic hanwriting too.
>> Makes words like _mýnn, munu_  quite indistinguishable...
>>
>> /BP
>>
> 
> Reminds me of Dutch <ij> which originally stood for long i, and was
> spelled that way to disambiguate from <n>, which could be confused in
> the script used at the time.
> 

That was usual in Old Swedish too.  They'd
spell _wij, tijd_ 'we, time/tide' and _mijn_
'mine (feminine nominative singular and
neuter nom/acc plural) distinguished from
_min_ (masculine nom/acc singular),
all spelled _vi tid, min_ in modern
Swedish.

They even did that trick with Roman
numerals: i. ij. iij iiij. v. vj. vij.

Of course all that is faithfully
reproduced in Mærik spelling, although
I think some _ii_ crept in, just as
in Old Swedish.

<http://wiki.frath.net/Maerik-English_vocabulary>
in fact shows only seven words with _ij_ and
a lot with _ii_.  I ought to fix that...

/BP 8^)>
-- 
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch atte melroch dotte se
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  "C'est en vain que nos Josués littéraires crient
  à la langue de s'arrêter; les langues ni le soleil
  ne s'arrêtent plus. Le jour où elles se *fixent*,
  c'est qu'elles meurent."           (Victor Hugo)