3 ms·
> No diacritics An understandably naïve view of things whose errancy could easily be corrected through your coöperative perusal of The New Yorker.
by yohoho22 10y ago
> No diacritics
An understandably naïve view of things whose errancy could easily be corrected through your coöperative perusal of The New Yorker.
- eru 10y agoWouldn't it be cöoperative?
- tremon 10y agoIt wouldn't be. The goal is to separate the second o from the first, not to separate the o from the c: The diaeresis indicates that a vowel should be pronounced apart from the letter that precedes it [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaeresis_%28diacritic%29#Diaeresis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaeresis_%28diacritic%29#Diae...
- eru 10y agoOh, true. Naive should have tipped me off.
- vacri 10y agoTo be fair, the original question was how to recognise English text, not how to recognise the archaic microcosm of English text that resides between the covers of The New Yorker.