Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually I was a bit surprised when I learned that Unicode only added a codepoint for it in 2008 (and even rejected an earlier proposal). While the spelling rules have said for some time to replace it with "SS" the glyph was used quite often, including official documents such as passports. For sorting there is standard (DIN 5007). Replacing ß with ss is correct (even in the lower case variant). The other letters are…
> Probably not something international software is aware of. Collation rules that vary by locale exist for this reason, and all major programming languages and OS'es support this. Of course whether the software you use does this or not depends on the developers writing the software.
The capital sharp S in now part of the official German orthography
331–340 of 377 posts
Re: The capital sharp S in now part of the official German orthography
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not one singular example. Speakers of German have used that letter occasionally for the last 120 years or so and there was a debate to introduce it the whole time.
Show an example of more than ten years ago, please.
Re: The capital sharp S in now part of the official German orthography
#333As a german, I see this as a step in the wrong direction. The sharp S is a PITA to begin with, so I'd rather abolish it completely. Now there's a whole bunch of complications coming from this - how do I type this? To type lowercase "ß", I press the key above "p" (in the same position as with qwerty) and "ü" (to the right of it), which will do "?" when pressed together with shift. So do we move "?" somewhere else? QWE…
Re: The capital sharp S in now part of the official German orthography
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
Annoyingly, English uses "th" for two rather different phonemes: þ ("thing") and ð ("this"). Icelandic maintains this useful distinction. I feel like English spelling would need at least half a dozen more letters to disambiguate. As it is, English is actually a not great choice for a global language because it's so unphonetic.
"Rather different" phonemes? There is no room for them to be more similar to each other without coinciding. And they contrast in only a single minimal pair, one element of which is incredibly rare.
Re: The capital sharp S in now part of the official German orthography
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not one singular example. Speakers of German have used that letter occasionally for the last 120 years or so and there was a debate to introduce it the whole time.
Show an example of more than ten years ago, please.
And any German passport (at least those issued after 1988, don't know about what was used before).
Re: The capital sharp S in now part of the official German orthography
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
My understanding is that proto-IndioEuropean had two genders: animate and inanimate which would have served a purpose. Later animate split into masculine/feminine. Some languages preserved all three, others dropped the inanimate (or it morphed into "neuter"). Much like English spelling it's all a mess now.
My native tongue is Lithuanian. There was never a inanimate/neuter gender and we got masculine/feminine ingrained deeply in the language. Some people say Lithuanian has kept most of proto-Indo European features. If that's true, inanimate/neuter had to evolve later than gender split.
The idea that Lithuanian is extremely conservative from a PIE perspective is rather outdated. Lithuanian does preserve a number of features of what might be termed “Proto-Nuclear-Indo-European” (to use the terminology of Lundvist & Yates), but the insights from the Anatolian languages show that not all of these features can be reconstructed back to Proto-Indo-European itself.
Re: The capital sharp S in now part of the official German orthography
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spanish would be a much better global language than English or French due to simple phonetics and overall consistency. Gendered nouns are really simple. I'd say the hardest part is the subjunctive case but it's not critical for communicating.
Disclaimer: I'm a Spanish newb. While there are good things about Spanish, speaking as a native English speaker there are annoyances too. One big on compared to English is that English is seemingly more economical with syllables than Spanish for many common words e.g. Demasiado, todavia, many adverbs like recientemente. Spanish does seem to be one if the better languages for gender of nouns in that fairly simple rule…
(Editing this comment because I made a conjugation mistake for the millionth time – "add" instead of "adds".)
Re: The capital sharp S in now part of the official German orthography
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do tell, which key is this "Compose"?
Depending on your keyboard layout, the key might be the "AltGr" key, or have an Apple logo, an MS logo or a penguin on it.
Re: The capital sharp S in now part of the official German orthography
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having a simple way to put it doesn't mean it's easy to do right. My native language don't have anything like articles. I frequently misuse a/the in borderline cases. Or just omit the article completely.. Yet gender is super easy in my language! Each noun has gendered suffix. Once you know the word, you know it's gender. Or once you know the gender, you know the suffix... :)
But it is easy once you understand :-) A == non-specific The == specific 'A dog' could be any old dog. 'The dog' is a specific dog we know. Thus A == any The == thing Perhaps I'm not clear where with this understanding it would trip you up. Can you think of an example?
On the other hand, I omit article completely more frequently than using a wrong one. I find I have to consciously think if I should use an article and which article should I use. When I write/talk quickly without double checking, shit happens. Even after using English a lot for 2 decades, articles is just a foreign feature that I have to use consciously.
Re: The capital sharp S in now part of the official German orthography
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
My native tongue is Lithuanian. There was never a inanimate/neuter gender and we got masculine/feminine ingrained deeply in the language. Some people say Lithuanian has kept most of proto-Indo European features. If that's true, inanimate/neuter had to evolve later than gender split.
Over the last 20 years or so, the consensus has grown in Indo-European linguistics that Proto-Indo-European had only the animate/inanimate distinction mentioned above. After the Anatolian branch and possibly Tocharian split off from the other Indo-European languages, the remaining core of IE languages developed the three genders masculine, feminine, and neuter. The idea that Lithuanian is extremely conservative from…
Got any links or literature on how that evolved according to the new school?