On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Peter Constable <petercon_at_microsoft.com>
wrote:
> When it comes to orthography, the notion of what comprise words of a
> language is generally pure convention. That’s because there isn’t any
> single *_linguistic_ *definition of word that gives the same answer when
> phonological vs. morphological or syntactic criteria are applied. There are
> book-length works on just this topic, such as this:
>
>
In particular, I see no need to change our recommendation on the character
used in contractions for English and many other languages (U+2019).
Similarly, we wouldn't recommend use of anything but the colon for marking
abbreviations in Swedish, or propose a new MODIFIER LETTER ELLIPSIS for
"supercali...docious".
(IMO, U+02BC was probably just a mistake; the minor benefit is not worth
the confusion.)
Mark <https://google.com/+MarkDavis>
*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
Received on Sat Jun 13 2015 - 10:28:54 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sat Jun 13 2015 - 10:28:54 CDT