Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Backtrack-Free Cursive

mmapped.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 133 posts

Re: Backtrack-Free Cursive

#81

Post by klez »

singpolyma3 wrote: post #65
JoshTriplett wrote: post #19

This is the kind of thing that makes cursive painful to read . The `i` and `j` in this script are harder to quickly lex, and the `t` (especially in the `tt` ligature) with the added loop flourish diverges sufficiently from a standard `t` to make it hard to decipher in running text. In text, as in code, I prefer to optimize for easy reading rather than faster writing.

Easy reading is achieved by typesetting later if needed. Writing by hand is painful and slow and it makes sense to optimize for the write operation as much as possible

Might as well go with shorthand, then. I'm not even joking. I guess it's harder to learn an additional script used only when writing and transcribing, but I wonder if it would make writing by hand less of a dying thing.

Re: Backtrack-Free Cursive

#82

Post by simiones »

andreyvit wrote: post #30

Wondering how many people are like me and hate writing in cursive. I stopped using it right after graduating high school (where it was required), never used in drafts after elementary school, and only ever used normal print letters in the university (and also included TeX commands because I was typesetting lecture notes later and was figuring out the optimal command set on the fly).

If I need to take notes by hand, I definitely prefer cursive writing (though I have my own variations & preferences, for example I write almost all capital letters in the print versions). I never saw a reason to learn to draw a more type-like font by hand, so that definitely feels much worse whenever I decide to do it (e.g. for filling in certain forms).

Re: Backtrack-Free Cursive

#83

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

gumby wrote: post #54
andreyvit wrote: post #30

Wondering how many people are like me and hate writing in cursive. I stopped using it right after graduating high school (where it was required), never used in drafts after elementary school, and only ever used normal print letters in the university (and also included TeX commands because I was typesetting lecture notes later and was figuring out the optimal command set on the fly).

I’m surprised, as the whole points of it are speed and duration (less cramping, less energy when moving the wrist). Discrete lettering is simply slower because it requires more motion.

I find I get significantly more cramping with cursive since there are fewer "rest" periods between the letters than with engineering block gothic lettering. Gothic lettering is much slower than cursive, but much more readable and (IMO) easier to write.

I'm dysgraphic, which probably plays some part in this.

Re: Backtrack-Free Cursive

#84

Post by cyberax »

ubermonkey wrote: post #62
demetrius wrote: post #56

I like writing in cursive, but I don’t see backtracking as a problem. I backtrack quite a lot in Cyrillic, even in Russian, e.g. I always underline ш and write a line over т (which looks like m) to distinguish them (otherwise they look quite similar, see the famous example лишили лилии — you might want to google it if you haven’t seen it yet). I also normally write д as ∂, which breaks the flow. Belarusian Cyrillic r…

>I always underline ш and write a line over т (which looks like m) to distinguish them Having studied Russian in college, I assumed that all Cyrillic script included a line over the т, because otherwise readability goes to hell. Is my impression here based on (a) an opinion of my Russian prof expressed as a universal rule or (b) a thing that's universal in Russian specifically, but not Belarusian Cyrillic or other si…

> Having studied Russian in college, I assumed that all Cyrillic script included a line over the т, because otherwise readability goes to hell.

It's entirely optional. In practice, there are very few words where т/ш pairs are needed for disambiguation.

> Did you end up mixing script in your native handwriting inadvertently?

Not really, but that's mostly because I have a somewhat personal style of English cursive, cobbled together from German and English hands.

Re: Backtrack-Free Cursive

#85

Post by Hamuko »

andreyvit wrote: post #30

Wondering how many people are like me and hate writing in cursive. I stopped using it right after graduating high school (where it was required), never used in drafts after elementary school, and only ever used normal print letters in the university (and also included TeX commands because I was typesetting lecture notes later and was figuring out the optimal command set on the fly).

Same story, except that I could stop writing in cursive after middle school as nobody in high school could be bothered to demand it. The only remnants of my cursive writing days are as part of my signature.

Re: Backtrack-Free Cursive

#86

Post by demetrius »

usrnm wrote: post #60
demetrius wrote: post #56

I like writing in cursive, but I don’t see backtracking as a problem. I backtrack quite a lot in Cyrillic, even in Russian, e.g. I always underline ш and write a line over т (which looks like m) to distinguish them (otherwise they look quite similar, see the famous example лишили лилии — you might want to google it if you haven’t seen it yet). I also normally write д as ∂, which breaks the flow. Belarusian Cyrillic r…

> I always underline ш and write a line over т Interesting. I think this style completely died out in Russia, I wasn't taught it and never really seen it outside of some old letters and documents. Interesting to hear it survived in Belarus

Our Belarusian teacher actually ш/т wrote it like that, I got it from her. It’s not very common in Belarus, either.

I think the real strongholds of this style are Serbia and [North] Macedonia. They even underline и and write a line over п (they can do this since they use ј instead of й).

Re: Backtrack-Free Cursive

#87

Post by vonunov »

weinzierl wrote: post #29

I really like the result. Especially the i and j with the connected dot. I expected them to look off but they really integrate nicely. That being said I don't think it is about Cyrillic vs Latin but more about traditional cursive vs modern. The traditional Latin cursives were all pretty much optimized to be written in one running flow. Kurrent and cursive all come from Latin currere which means running . Admittedly n…

>But then again I also never seen anyone writing a word and doing the dots afterwards.

Interesting, I'd never really heard of it being done any other way. I suppose it occurred to me that it could be done otherwise, but I'd more or less assumed the "all in a batch at the end of each word" way was all but universal. (When writing at speed -- trying to keep up with an overflowing buffer -- this tends to lead to all the 't's in a word sharing one long crossbar, and the dots floating somewhere high and right of where they should be, depending on how far I'm lagging behind the verbal "point of focus", if that makes any sense.)

Re: Backtrack-Free Cursive

#88

Post by WillAdams »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #19

This is the kind of thing that makes cursive painful to read . The `i` and `j` in this script are harder to quickly lex, and the `t` (especially in the `tt` ligature) with the added loop flourish diverges sufficiently from a standard `t` to make it hard to decipher in running text. In text, as in code, I prefer to optimize for easy reading rather than faster writing.

It also makes writing more difficult --- the doubled-up pen movements help get ink flowing, esp. on certain letters at certain angles, esp. w/ a fountain pen.

Re: Backtrack-Free Cursive

#89

Post by roman-kashitsyn »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #19

This is the kind of thing that makes cursive painful to read . The `i` and `j` in this script are harder to quickly lex, and the `t` (especially in the `tt` ligature) with the added loop flourish diverges sufficiently from a standard `t` to make it hard to decipher in running text. In text, as in code, I prefer to optimize for easy reading rather than faster writing.

> In text, as in code, I prefer to optimize for easy reading rather than faster writing.

Author here!

It really depends on what you write.

When I write something for others to read, I type it or (on special occasions) write it one letter at a time with a calligraphy pen.

I’m the only intended reader for almost all of my handwriting (personal journal, article drafts, exercises, and notes). In this setting, it’s much more natural to optimize the script for enjoyment, convenience, and speed. But even then, I think my script is still quite legible.

Re: Backtrack-Free Cursive

#90

Post by NoGravitas »

As a USAian and an Old, I learned the Zaner-Bloser script in school - a cursive script that tries to minimize pen lifts, but still has "backtracks" as this article calls them, for j, i, and x. It uses a lot of the same kind of loops that this script uses, just for the simpler problem of joins. The downside of the Zaner-Bloser system, as well as Palmer and anything that derives from Spencerian cursive, is that when written quickly, the loops can make several letters only distinguishable by context (is that a short 'l', or a long 'e'?), and the handwriting of adults becomes pretty unreadable after leaving school.

Since then, I re-taught myself to write with an Italic hand, which has more "backtracks" (for instance, 'e' is two strokes) and fewer joins (you never join from e, o, r, or any letter with a descender), and while my speed has suffered somewhat, everyone who sees my handwriting compliments it.

If your hand cramps while writing, it is because you are holding the pen too tightly, possibly in order to apply too much pressure. This is something that writing with ball-point pens will cause you to do. If you don't want to use a fountain pen, at least try a liquid ink rollerball.

Post reply on HN