Print

Print


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.