5 ms·
Linked from a comment in the languagehat article is the Wikipedia talk page for the "Burmese alphabet" article, which puts that claim into doubt: https://en.wik
by yorwba 6y ago
Linked from a comment in the languagehat article is the Wikipedia talk page for the "Burmese alphabet" article, which puts that claim into doubt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Burmese_alphabet#Glyph_inverted_due_to_typewriter_error%3F https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Burmese_alphabet#Glyph_in...
- toomuchtodo 6y agoA friend is reaching out to Ian Frazer, who authored a piece called "typewriter man" that references this claim, to obtain the provenance of it. I will return to provide an update (and update Wikipedia), if something of substance results. If I don't return before the reply window closes for this thread, check Wikipedia for those who encounter this thread in the future.
- textfiles 6y agoI'm going to trust the family over Wikipedia.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoI didn’t say they were lying. I thought it’d be enjoyable to keep pulling the historical thread to see where it leads and codify it in a knowledge repository of some permanence (stick the docs into an IA item, cite it in Wikipedia). Scratching my digital historian itch, doing the future a favor, that’s all. Regardless, thanks for the post, I really enjoyed a peak into Pearl and Martin’s work, and yours.
- textfiles 6y agoI have a reaction when we've got years (and years and years) of this and someone says "well, they're fighting about it on Wikipedia" like that means a single darn thing. Glad you like the stuff; always up for people having the specific link.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoI don’t blame you at all. I just wanted to make my intent clear.