Re: Official language question!

Roger wrote;

>>>
Wasn't there also an old practice-- if a 1-syl form had a long (double)
vowel, that was also written in derived forms. e.g. laat - laater??? I
could be wrong, but I cut my Dutch teeth, so to speak, on an 1850s book,
using a 1930s dictionary, and it was quite confuzzing.
<<<

I've never seen this, it looks quite weird. I don't think so.

>>>
One bit of strangeness I still remember: 1853 ligchaam, modern lichaam
'body'
<<<

Looks even weirder, but you actually read it! In the past a lot of strange
spelling occurred, so I can imagine that you have trouble with it.
Even to our generation (well, at least to me) we have to make an effort
to read *and* understand books older than 150 years

Rob