On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 08:12:39AM +0000, R A Brown wrote: > On 14/01/2014 00:53, Sylvia Sotomayor wrote: > >What do people think of umlauts? Using an umlauted i and > >an umlauted e to represent ɨ and ɛ ? > > To which > on 14/01/2014 01:30, David Peterson replied: > >Please no. > > Which prompted the reply - > > On 14/01/2014 02:04, Nathan Klassen wrote: > [snip] > >Why ever not? Seems like a not unreasonable use of a > >diaresis. > > It is not a reasonable use of _diaeresis_ which is when two > vowels in adjacent syllables are pronounced separately as in > _coöperate_ or the Welsh _copïau_ (copies). > > This was the original use of two dots or 'trema.' But they > also came to be used, instead of a small superimposed _e_, > in German to denote vowels modified by i-umlaut, i.e. > fronted, e.g. Vater (father) ~ Väter (fathers). > > I guess purists would object to those two little dots being > used in any other way, except for diaeresis or i-umlaut. > But that doesn't put of natlangs! The Albanians happily > write [ə] as ë ;) [...] Not to mention that Russian writes ё for /jo/, and (some transliterations of) Greek writes ë for /e:/, so that the name /zoe:/ comes out as Zoë, which, due to my brain's foreign language slot being filled with Russian, reads to me as /zojo/, a truly unfortunate circumstance. :-P T -- What are you when you run out of Monet? Baroque.