4 ms·

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaeresis_(diacritic) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaeresis_(diacritic) Indicates that the two o's are separate syllables.

globular-toast 1y ago
In French. It's long since disappeared from English, even in words like "naive". It's pointless in English because we have nothing remotely close to phonetic spelling. If we want to bring back cool things from French can we start with reverting to spellings like "connexion", "reflexion" etc.?
- JimDabell 1y ago
  It hasn’t disappeared. You’re literally commenting on an example of it being used in English.
  - thaumasiotes 1y ago
    It isn't used in English in any context other than writing published in the New Yorker... except for the word "naive" (and "naif"), where it is still sometimes used. The criticism of the New Yorker is well founded.
    - JimDabell 1y ago
      I’ve never been published in the New Yorker, and I use it. People with the names Chloë, Zoë, etc. might be surprised to hear they have been imagining their names too. It’s in use. It hasn’t disappeared. It’s not the norm, but it is definitely still in use.
      - globular-toast 1y ago
        Girls' names can hardly be considered "English". I've seen all of Chloé, Aimée, Zoé etc. There are no rules. It was hard for me to type those on my English keyboard. That's reason enough for me to say they are not really part of English any more and haven't been for decades. I do like writing connexion sometimes, and I note that this isn't even considered a spelling error in my installed dictionary, unlike coördinate, but I'm not going to claim that it's "still in use" because I read a dictionary one time.
        JimDabell 1y ago
        > I'm not going to claim that it's "still in use" because I read a dictionary one time. It’s not “still in use” because it’s in the dictionary. It’s “still in use” because it’s still in use.
    - 0xBDB 1y ago
      Coöperate. And coordinate, etc. Also mostly seen in the New Yorker these days due to their style guide, but occasionally elsewhere.

globular-toast 1y ago

In French. It's long since disappeared from English, even in words like "naive". It's pointless in English because we have nothing remotely close to phonetic spelling. If we want to bring back cool things from French can we start with reverting to spellings like "connexion", "reflexion" etc.?

JimDabell 1y ago
It hasn’t disappeared. You’re literally commenting on an example of it being used in English.
- thaumasiotes 1y ago
  It isn't used in English in any context other than writing published in the New Yorker... except for the word "naive" (and "naif"), where it is still sometimes used. The criticism of the New Yorker is well founded.
  - JimDabell 1y ago
    I’ve never been published in the New Yorker, and I use it. People with the names Chloë, Zoë, etc. might be surprised to hear they have been imagining their names too. It’s in use. It hasn’t disappeared. It’s not the norm, but it is definitely still in use.
    - globular-toast 1y ago
      Girls' names can hardly be considered "English". I've seen all of Chloé, Aimée, Zoé etc. There are no rules. It was hard for me to type those on my English keyboard. That's reason enough for me to say they are not really part of English any more and haven't been for decades. I do like writing connexion sometimes, and I note that this isn't even considered a spelling error in my installed dictionary, unlike coördinate, but I'm not going to claim that it's "still in use" because I read a dictionary one time.
      - JimDabell 1y ago
        > I'm not going to claim that it's "still in use" because I read a dictionary one time. It’s not “still in use” because it’s in the dictionary. It’s “still in use” because it’s still in use.
  - 0xBDB 1y ago
    Coöperate. And coordinate, etc. Also mostly seen in the New Yorker these days due to their style guide, but occasionally elsewhere.