questions & comments
Rebecca and Rowland
Thu, 9 Jul 1998 23:08:52 +0100
At 7:49 am -0400 8/7/98, Hilmar Schlegel wrote:
>Thierry Bouche wrote:
>It would be worth to have a look in British phone books to see what
>their attitude is. If they follow the American practice I'd say it is a
>bad attitude not to follow the continental usage.
I think you'll find that British phone directories aren't following
American practice when they leave out accents. I'm not *sure* that accents
aren't used in phone directories here, but I don't recall seeing any
accents in a phone directory, and I've just looked and failed to find any
(although Bolton in Lancashire where I am at the moment isn't the most
cosmopolitan part of the country. It does have rather a lot of people from
the Indian subcontinent, but Urdu names transliterated into English seem to
avoid accents anyway.
>It is the old discussion about proper names and how far one can use
>"original" writing and fonts from a foreign alphabet. I think that we
>have to become more flexible here to avoid to end up all in plain
>English one day.
Good on yer.
> The development in font technology allows this at least
>by increasing flexibility.
>If proper English requires not to use sz, then please use s-long s-final
>instead - or is this forbidden???? ;-)
Not so much forbidden as impossible. Where on Earth am I going to get a
long s from? Or do you seriously expect me to use Yannis Fraktur all the
>BTW, exactly according the same dogma the new German spelling reform
>implies the revival of the long s and its need in every font...
Can you say more about this?