[Spellyans] dictionnaire de l'Académie française
ray at spyrys.org
Mon Jan 31 09:03:09 GMT 2011
To first take Michael's point below. He makes a very good case for
showing diacritical marks in dictionaries and text books.
And that is why we use diacritics, Ray. We write "Lûk" and "lùck",
keeping their traditional word-shapes. If you want to show the
linguistic distinctions (from *luk [lʏk]~[lɪk] for instance) without
diacritics, then you have to resort to "Loek" or "Louk" and "loeck" or
For showing diacritical marks everywhere, Eddie has hit the nail on
the head. No one has yet been able to demonstrate to me a speedy way
of entering all the necessary diacritical marks at a reasonable typing
rate. Perhaps an expensive bit of software is required in which case
type setters of simple Cornish short story books, magazines etc. will
not put the marks in.
On 30 Gen 2011, at 15:40, Eddie Climo wrote:
> As an aside, one stumbling block to diacritics is their impact on
> typing speed. I've been using computers for decades, and have taught
> myself to touch-type (courtesy of dear Mavis Beacon!). In English or
> UC without diacritics, I normally hit about 60+ words a minute. Add
> in diacritics, though, and my speed drops way way down, despite the
> fact I've been keying them on Mac keyboards in French, German,
> Spanish, Welsh and Scots Gaelic (as well as UC+diacritics!) for up
> to 20 years! On Windows PCs I'm even slower!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Spellyans