Re: USAGE: No rants! (USAGE: di"f"thong)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Isaac Penzev wrote:

> Keith Gaughan wrote:
>
> |  3. Because it's easier to recycle two existing letters than to
> |     introduce new ones (languages using Cyrillic being an obvious
> |     example to the contrary).
>
> That's only half true. Indeed a lot of ex-USSR langs using Cyrillic use
> additional or modified letters. But some of them, esp. langs of the Northern
> Caucasus (including Turkic langs of Caucasus, like Kumyk and
> Karachay-Balkar), use digraphs, and even a few trigraphs. The modifying
> element is usually "Roman digit one" (Unicode U+04C0, for some strange
> reasons called "palochka"), "hard sign" (Unicode U+042A/U+044A) and "soft
> sign" (Unicode U+042C/U+044C). E.g. /q/ in Kumyk is represented with a
> digraph къ.
That's actually exactly what I meant. Sorry for not being clear. I was
just contrasting the relative conservatism that languages using the
Latin alphabet with those using Cyrillic when it comes to adding and
modifying letters as opposed to using digraphs and so on.

- --
Keith Gaughan | http://talideon.com/
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.
    -- Leonardo Da Vinci (attributed)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEfeWGaC1DzM+fZHMRAtkwAJ9djkKVw3vK7jAIZ/Uo0OdzncqtnACgnjGk
/AAVNqeFWVvlK4P3J3kSSmQ=
=sQ8Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply