Michael Everson scripsit:
> True. But lo! you have inadvertently misspelled it! It isn't fo'c'sle
> -- it's fo'c's'le! (New Oxford, 2001). It's pronounced ['fouksel].
What an absurd spelling. It's on all fours with Lewis Carroll's
idiosyncratic spellings "sha'n't", "wo'n't", and so on. "Fo'c
At 09:10 -0400 2002-08-21, James E. Agenbroad wrote:
> > >There is also fo'c'sle, the abridged version of "forecastle". :-)
I wrote:
> > There are no glottal stops there.
Jim wrote:
> I only wanted to add an English example of multiple apostrophes in a
>word. No made no claim for how i
ision.
Martin
- Original Message -
From: "Andrew C. West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 4:42 AM
Subject: Re: FW: New version of TR29:
> On Tue, 20 August 2002, "Martin Heijdra&qu
On Tue, 20 August 2002, "Martin Heijdra" wrote:
>
> Just FYI (I have not been following this thread): "officially" in the
> bibliographic community, there is NO apostrophe in Wade-Giles K'ang-hsi, or
> in Korean aspirated characters; it's an ayn (02BBAYN / MODIFIER LETTER
> TURNED COMMA ). T
To ride on the apostrophe wave:
in Ukrainian (and older Russian orthography), apostrophe
separates syllabes where it would otherwise cause incorrect
palatalization of previous consonant, in compound words or
in prefixes (об'єктивне, to show that б is not palatalized).
So it has the same function
On 08/20/2002 08:32:53 PM "John D. Burger" wrote:
>Thus, I would have an issue
>with the argument that the apostrophe is merely part of the spelling of
>the word "hill's". There is no such word.
There certainly is such a wordform; you have used it in your illustrative
sentence. It is a phonolo
John D. Burger wrote:
> Thus, I would have an issue with the argument that the apostrophe is
> merely part of the spelling of the word "hill's". There is no such
> word.
I think the folks who make Science Diet dog and cat food might disagree:
http://www.hillspet.com
More seriously, I thought
Michael Everson scripsit:
> [T]he OED notes that the prefix has been variously written: "Macdonald,
> MacDonald, McDonald, McDonald, M'Donald". I can't say I've
> seen the last one in any text more recent than the 18th century, but
> it is certainly indicative of the use of apostrophe as a mar
As another datapoint the following details the use of the apostrophe in Finnish
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/kielikello/merkit.html#heittomerkki
It's in Finnish :-) so allow me to summarize:
(1) if consonant gradation (the change or even elision) of consonants would cause
two same vowels belong
> Then there are two uses of apostrophies in quoting: within secondary quotation
> marks
Urk. I meant "within quotation marks as secondary quotation marks".
John, Marco,
The practice of writing anglicized Irish names in English orthography
is rather interesting. Original "Ó Briain" is written "O'Brien" where
the apostrophe both mimics the original acute, and incidentally
functions as a kind of hyphen, showing that the two parts of the name
are co
At 20:07 +0100 2002-08-20, Marion Gunn wrote:
>In re the 'ornamental' use of the apostrophe to anglicize Irish surnames, I
>believe that practice to be unique to English (viz., inserting an
>apostrophe where nothing is omitted, and it does not function as a
>punctuation mark).
It's not ornamenta
At 13:58 -0400 2002-08-20, James E. Agenbroad wrote:
>There is also fo'c'sle, the abridged version of "forecastle". :-)
There are no glottal stops there.
--
Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
ps.
In re the 'ornamental' use of the apostrophe to anglicize Irish surnames, I
believe that practice to be unique to English (viz., inserting an
apostrophe where nothing is omitted, and it does not function as a
punctuation mark).
Am I wrong, or is what I call the English practice actually uniqu
Arsa Doug Ewell:
>John Cowan wrote:
>
>> How about this heuristic:
>>
>> Break after an apostrophe that is the second or third letter in the
>> word. Do not break after apostrophes that come later. This neatly
>> handles (I think) all the English, Italian, and Esperanto cases, and
>> a good man
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Michael Everson wrote:
> At 10:10 -0700 2002-08-20, Andrew C. West wrote:
> >On Tue, 20 August 2002, John Cowan wrote:
> >
> > > It has no sound, but neither does Romance "h"; both
> >exist as a marker of etymology.
> >
> >But in fact the apostrophe may have a sound in dial
Michael Everson scripsit:
> U+02BC will have a place in the alphabet and affect sorting in
> languages like Hawai'ian. U+2019 doesn't. The former is used as a
> letter; the latter is used as a mark of punctuation.
IIRC, practical San orthography ignores click letters for sorting purposes
thoug
John Cowan wrote:
> What I've never understood is why Unicode is so adamant that the ' of
> English words is a punctuation mark, not a letter; why when disambiguating
> U+0027, English apostrophe is to be mapped to U+2019 and not U+02BC.
> It's true that historically "isn't" is derived from "is n
Arsa Doug Ewell:
>John Cowan wrote:
>
>> How about this heuristic:
>>
>> Break after an apostrophe that is the second or third letter in the
>> word. Do not break after apostrophes that come later. This neatly
>> handles (I think) all the English, Italian, and Esperanto cases, and
>> a good man
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Andrew C. West wrote:
> On Tue, 20 August 2002, John Cowan wrote:
>
> > It has no sound, but neither does Romance "h"; both exist as a
> > marker of
> > etymology.
> >
>
> But in fact the apostrophe may have a sound in dialectal English, where it is
> used to represent a
At 12:46 -0400 2002-08-20, John Cowan wrote:
>Doug Ewell scripsit:
>
>> As enticing as it sounds, disunifying it would not solve the problem; it
>> would simply move it from the text boundaries category to the legacy
>> data conversion category.
>
>Somewhat off the topic:
>
>What I've never und
syllables. Of course,
usage outside this group of people varies.
Martin Heijdra
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Ewell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Andrew C. West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 11:56 AM
Subje
At 10:10 -0700 2002-08-20, Andrew C. West wrote:
>On Tue, 20 August 2002, John Cowan wrote:
>
> > It has no sound, but neither does Romance "h"; both
>exist as a marker of etymology.
>
>But in fact the apostrophe may have a sound in dialectal English,
>where it is used to represent a medial or
On Tue, 20 August 2002, John Cowan wrote:
> It has no sound, but neither does Romance "h"; both exist as a marker of
> etymology.
>
But in fact the apostrophe may have a sound in dialectal English, where it is used to
represent a
medial or final glotal stop (e.g. "a drin' a wa'er" for "a drink
Doug Ewell scripsit:
> As enticing as it sounds, disunifying it would not solve the problem; it
> would simply move it from the text boundaries category to the legacy
> data conversion category.
Somewhat off the topic:
What I've never understood is why Unicode is so adamant that the ' of
Engli
>> "G'iyosaddin" would (sorry for the silly word, it's the middle name of
>> a medieval poet, but it's the first thing that came into my mind, and
>> "g'" is not such a rare combination in Uzbek that this is the only
>> case).
MC> It depends on what you mean by "sensibly".
You can't expect the r
Andrew C. West wrote:
> Does not work with K'ang-hsi or Ch'ien-lung, or apostrophes used in
> IPA and other systems of phonetic transcription.
>
> Seems to me that one apostrophe is not enough - how about a NON-
> BREAKING APOSTROPHE for cases like K'ang-hsi or Ch'ien-lung, and by
> default the
Radovan Garabik wrote:
> In Esperanto, apostrophe comes either at the end of a word (instead of
> -o), or in definite article, but the latter case, unlike italian, is
> written with space after the article (l' Esperant') so you can stop
> worrying about this.
I notice that this rule is often viol
Andrew C. West wrote:
> On Tue, 20 August 2002, John Cowan wrote:
>
> > How about this heuristic:
> >
> > Break after an apostrophe that is the second or third letter in the
> > word. Do not break after apostrophes that come later. This neatly
> > handles (I think) all the English, Italian, an
Philipp Reichmuth wrote:
> JC> Break after an apostrophe that is the second or third
> letter in the
> JC> word. Do not break after apostrophes that come later.
>
> JC> This neatly handles (I think) all the English
>
> "we'll", "we've", "it's" split. "must've" or "should've" don't split.
>
>
Philipp Reichmuth wrote:
> MC> "O'zbek" would not split, because the apostrophe is not
> followed by "a",
> MC> "e", "i", "o", "u" or "y".
>
> "G'iyosaddin" would (sorry for the silly word, it's the middle name of
> a medieval poet, but it's the first thing that came into my mind, and
> "g'" is
On Tue, 20 August 2002, John Cowan wrote:
> How about this heuristic:
>
> Break after an apostrophe that is the second or third letter in the
> word. Do not break after apostrophes that come later. This neatly
> handles (I think) all the English, Italian, and Esperanto cases, and
> a good man
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 07:39:38AM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Marco Cimarosti scripsit:
>
> > The issue is making the error window as narrow as possible. My assumption is
> > that is common words such as "c'", "d'", "j'", "l'", "n'", "qu'", "s'", "t'"
> > or "v'" are more common than edge cases l
John Cowan wrote:
> How about this heuristic:
>
> Break after an apostrophe that is the second or third letter in the
> word. Do not break after apostrophes that come later. This neatly
> handles (I think) all the English, Italian, and Esperanto cases, and
> a good many of the French ones.
I'
>> Just to give another example: Uzbek in Latin script uses "o'" and "g'"
>> as opposed to "o" and "g", such as in the language designation
>> "O'zbek" where "o'" stands for the sound designated in Cyrillic script
>> by U+040E and "g'" is equivalent to U+0493.
MC> "O'zbek" would not split, becaus
JC> Break after an apostrophe that is the second or third letter in the
JC> word. Do not break after apostrophes that come later.
JC> This neatly handles (I think) all the English
"we'll", "we've", "it's" split. "must've" or "should've" don't split.
"Isn't", "don't" and "doesn't" don't, either
How about "I'll" or "it's".
Regards,
Addison
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of John Cowan
> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 4:40 AM
> To: Marco Cimarosti
> Cc: '[EMA
John Cowan wrote:
> Marco Cimarosti scripsit:
>
> > The issue is making the error window as narrow as possible.
> My assumption is
> > that is common words such as "c'", "d'", "j'", "l'", "n'",
> "qu'", "s'", "t'"
> > or "v'" are more common than edge cases like "prud'homme".
>
> How about thi
Marco Cimarosti scripsit:
> The issue is making the error window as narrow as possible. My assumption is
> that is common words such as "c'", "d'", "j'", "l'", "n'", "qu'", "s'", "t'"
> or "v'" are more common than edge cases like "prud'homme".
How about this heuristic:
Break after an apostroph
39 matches
Mail list logo
