Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English-language sources): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Graphemes: Reply |
|||
Line 100:
:A grapheme is a basic functional unit of writing. There is actually some disagreement among scholars of grapholinguistics over where to draw the line, but suffice it to say I understand the plurality position is represented here. That is to say, the [[glyph]]s {{gph|æ}} and {{gph|ae}} can both represent the grapheme {{gpm|æ}} in situations where distinct from the digraph {{gpm|a}} followed by {{gpm|e}}. {{gph|æ}} is simply the combined ligature form that is often preferred for clarity, but the digraph still functions as the grapheme {{gpm|æ}}. As {{gpm|æ}} is not "its own letter" in modern English, this usually isn't the case. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 02:24, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
::I think the two passages should be rearticulated for clarity, but I understand it as saying that we should normalize <em>typographic</em> ligatures, but not ones that represent distinct graphemes in the context of the writing system used. Meaning, {{gpm|æ}} was its own letter in the [[Old English Latin alphabet]], so it should not be normalized. However, {{gph|æ}} is not its own letter in the Modern English word ''encyclopædia'', so it should be normalized. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">[[User:Remsense|<span style="color:#fff">'''Remsense'''</span>]]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>[[User talk:Remsense|<span lang="zh" style="color:#fff">'''论'''</span>]]</span> 02:33, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
| |||