Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!cam-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.idt.net!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!not-for-mail
From: deb5@midway.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff)
Subject: Re: Languages written without diacritics
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ellis-nfs.uchicago.edu
Message-ID: <E1uJ9w.69H@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Organization: The University of Chicago
References: <574oqq$a2m@sparcserver.lrz-muenchen.de> <runderhill-2711961411260001@underhill.sdsu.edu> <32a6d205.21481258@news.cris.com> <57vn9b$aki@dove.nist.gov>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 16:32:19 GMT
Lines: 18

In article <57vn9b$aki@dove.nist.gov>,
John E Koontz <koontz@cam.nist.gov> wrote:
>Aren't the dots over lower case i and j effectively diacritics?
>
How so?  Diacritics are marks added to characters to distinguish different
values of them.  Where are the undotted 'i' and 'j' that contrast in value 
to 'i' and 'j'?  

(Yes, yes, Turkish.  But we're not talking about Turkish, we're talking
about English.  Furthermore, we all know that Turkish is the innovator in
this respect.  Does this mean that English, without the slightest
noticeable change to its writing system, suddenly acquires diacritics c.
1910?)

-- 
	 Daniel "Da" von Brighoff    /\          Dilettanten
	(deb5@midway.uchicago.edu)  /__\         erhebt Euch
				   /____\      gegen die Kunst!
