5 ms·

For fantaſy, eſpecially, I diſagree. When I'm in charge, the long-ſ will be mandatory in any ſtory involving magick, to better ſhew the hiſtorical baſis of the

For fantaſy, eſpecially, I diſagree. When I'm in charge, the long-ſ will be mandatory in any ſtory involving magick, to better ſhew the hiſtorical baſis of the mythology (unleſs, of courſe, a ſkinwalker were to be involved, in which caſe American ſpellings are indeed preferred)

tazjin 3y ago
Фор бетер іммерсіон, ол тектс ін сторіес И ред шѵд бе урітен уіþ олд сирілік летерс, регардлес ов þе лангѵадж.
- adhesive_wombat 3y ago
  𐡅𐡉 𐡍𐡕 𐡀𐡓𐡌𐡉𐡊
- Lex-2008 3y ago
  ᚳᚫᚾ᛫ᛁ᛫ᚫᛞᛞ᛫ᚫ᛫ᛒᛁᛏ᛫ᚩᚠ᛫ᚱᚢᚾᛖᛋ᛫ᛏᚩ᛫ᛏᚻᛖ᛫ᛗᛁᛉ?
  - weregiraffe 3y ago
    פור טקסטס סט ין אנשיאנט טיימס, אונלי עברית וילל דו.
    - names_are_hard 3y ago
      Incredible. I sent that to Google translate and it translated fairly well. (For those who can't read it - the text is English transliterated into Hebrew script, not actually Hebrew. I'm impressed that Google managed to make sense of it)
- dullcrisp 3y ago
  I think you’re on to something
- sk0g 3y ago
  > уіþ Was the thorn really a part of old Cyrillic? Would make some sense given the shared history, but still. > И I struggled for a bit with this one, but I don't know of a better way to represent it other then "ai" in Cyrillic I guess. The "ѵ" is interesting too, never seen that before since you can make do with the sorta B-looking letter instead.
  - drdaeman 3y ago
    > Was the thorn really a part of old Cyrillic? No, never was a thing. Early Cyrillic had a bunch of unique letters that are long gone, but it never had "þ" in there. > The "ѵ" is interesting too It's from Greek "Y" (upsilon) and it - depending on the place - could've meant either /i/ or /v/ sound (and /u/ when in "оѵ" digraph, so parent comment has it wrong): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izhitsa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izhitsa
  - b4dot 3y ago
    There're several mistakes: - instead þ could be used ѳ; - с in тектс is missed, it should be текстс or better теѯтс; - ѵ is basically Greek upsilon which appeared in English mostly as u [auto] or y [system], therefore шѵд would be better written as шоѵд where /oѵ/ in old Cyrillic pronounsed as /u/ as in Greek, or just шꙋд; - дж in лангѵадж could be writtend as џ; And so on.
    - tazjin 3y ago
      Thanks, these are good. I took inspiration from this horrible PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/14YgpdJ-k5M-GiwRDblvnEtsFvok_Vl9d/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/14YgpdJ-k5M-GiwRDblvnEtsFvok...
rezaprima 3y ago
Sadly I still read the s as f so I keep got stumped. "fantafy?"
- martopix 3y ago
  I read someone saying that reading text with the long s is like hearing someone speak with a lisp, and that is SO true. I love it.
- adhesive_wombat 3y ago
  Reminds me of a Just William story where he copied a letter from a letter-writing guide book, studiously converting all the "f"s into "s"s.
unscaled 3y ago
I have to say that the long-s looks quite horrible in Verdana, and probably most other sans-serif font. That makes sense, since most Sans Serif typefaces significantly postdate the abandonment of the long-s. If you want to see how it should look in context, here's a typical 17th century example: https://www.raptisrarebooks.com/images/86066/paradise-lost-a-poem-in-ten-books-john-milton-first-edition.jpg https://www.raptisrarebooks.com/images/86066/paradise-lost-a... The prints from the 18th century are even nicer with better quality and consistency in general. The Caslon typefaces are pretty exemplary here: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/A_Specimen_by_William_Caslon.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/A_Specim... Roman typefaces with a long-s are a very 17th-18th century thing. A blackletter (gothic) typeface gets you closer, but all of that is still not very much medieval. What you really want is a meticulously manuscript in Carolingian Miniscule[1] or Uncial script[2], complete with killer rabbits[3] and knights fighting snails[4]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_minuscule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_minuscule [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncial_script https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncial_script [3] https://blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2021/06/killer-rabbits.html https://blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2021/06/killer-rabb... [4] https://blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2013/09/knight-v-snail.html https://blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2013/09/knight-v-sn...

tazjin 3y ago

Фор бетер іммерсіон, ол тектс ін сторіес И ред шѵд бе урітен уіþ олд сирілік летерс, регардлес ов þе лангѵадж.

adhesive_wombat 3y ago
𐡅𐡉 𐡍𐡕 𐡀𐡓𐡌𐡉𐡊
Lex-2008 3y ago
ᚳᚫᚾ᛫ᛁ᛫ᚫᛞᛞ᛫ᚫ᛫ᛒᛁᛏ᛫ᚩᚠ᛫ᚱᚢᚾᛖᛋ᛫ᛏᚩ᛫ᛏᚻᛖ᛫ᛗᛁᛉ?
- weregiraffe 3y ago
  פור טקסטס סט ין אנשיאנט טיימס, אונלי עברית וילל דו.
  - names_are_hard 3y ago
    Incredible. I sent that to Google translate and it translated fairly well. (For those who can't read it - the text is English transliterated into Hebrew script, not actually Hebrew. I'm impressed that Google managed to make sense of it)
dullcrisp 3y ago
I think you’re on to something
sk0g 3y ago
> уіþ Was the thorn really a part of old Cyrillic? Would make some sense given the shared history, but still. > И I struggled for a bit with this one, but I don't know of a better way to represent it other then "ai" in Cyrillic I guess. The "ѵ" is interesting too, never seen that before since you can make do with the sorta B-looking letter instead.
- drdaeman 3y ago
  > Was the thorn really a part of old Cyrillic? No, never was a thing. Early Cyrillic had a bunch of unique letters that are long gone, but it never had "þ" in there. > The "ѵ" is interesting too It's from Greek "Y" (upsilon) and it - depending on the place - could've meant either /i/ or /v/ sound (and /u/ when in "оѵ" digraph, so parent comment has it wrong): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izhitsa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izhitsa
- b4dot 3y ago
  There're several mistakes: - instead þ could be used ѳ; - с in тектс is missed, it should be текстс or better теѯтс; - ѵ is basically Greek upsilon which appeared in English mostly as u [auto] or y [system], therefore шѵд would be better written as шоѵд where /oѵ/ in old Cyrillic pronounsed as /u/ as in Greek, or just шꙋд; - дж in лангѵадж could be writtend as џ; And so on.
  - tazjin 3y ago
    Thanks, these are good. I took inspiration from this horrible PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/14YgpdJ-k5M-GiwRDblvnEtsFvok_Vl9d/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/14YgpdJ-k5M-GiwRDblvnEtsFvok...

rezaprima 3y ago

Sadly I still read the s as f so I keep got stumped. "fantafy?"

martopix 3y ago
I read someone saying that reading text with the long s is like hearing someone speak with a lisp, and that is SO true. I love it.
adhesive_wombat 3y ago
Reminds me of a Just William story where he copied a letter from a letter-writing guide book, studiously converting all the "f"s into "s"s.

unscaled 3y ago

I have to say that the long-s looks quite horrible in Verdana, and probably most other sans-serif font. That makes sense, since most Sans Serif typefaces significantly postdate the abandonment of the long-s. If you want to see how it should look in context, here's a typical 17th century example: https://www.raptisrarebooks.com/images/86066/paradise-lost-a-poem-in-ten-books-john-milton-first-edition.jpg https://www.raptisrarebooks.com/images/86066/paradise-lost-a... The prints from the 18th century are even nicer with better quality and consistency in general. The Caslon typefaces are pretty exemplary here: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/A_Specimen_by_William_Caslon.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/A_Specim... Roman typefaces with a long-s are a very 17th-18th century thing. A blackletter (gothic) typeface gets you closer, but all of that is still not very much medieval. What you really want is a meticulously manuscript in Carolingian Miniscule[1] or Uncial script[2], complete with killer rabbits[3] and knights fighting snails[4]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_minuscule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_minuscule [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncial_script https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncial_script [3] https://blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2021/06/killer-rabbits.html https://blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2021/06/killer-rabb... [4] https://blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2013/09/knight-v-snail.html https://blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2013/09/knight-v-sn...