• Tanis Nikana
          link
          1029 days ago

          80% of your comment history is bent on those letters. Is that all you want to be known for?

          • @BigPotato
            link
            1629 days ago

            None of us will be “known” for anything on this website. It will all fade. Let them try to be quirky to rage against oblivion, it hardly impacts your life.

            In fact, I’m thankful for the stupid trend because I had no idea how to read some of those names in Fire Emblem: Heroes.

            • Tanis Nikana
              link
              829 days ago

              Eh, fair.

              But English is hard enough without that kind of dickery.

          • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkinOP
            link
            fedilink
            -1729 days ago

            Are ðose letters really so offensive to you ðat ðey warrant being what you define someone else by?

            • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ
              link
              1929 days ago

              It’s more that it makes your posts hard to read for no reason other than a painfully transparent and desperate cry to be “unique” and “quirky.” That said, you do you, man.

            • Tanis Nikana
              link
              929 days ago

              Lovely, that you paint me as “offended by these letters.”

              You don’t know me.

              Go back to your fucking ð.

                • @ChronosTriggerWarning
                  link
                  629 days ago

                  This is why kids need hugs, folks. If they get neglected, they turn into annoying attention seekers on the Internet.

                  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkinOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    -828 days ago

                    Again, definitely someþing said by a very mentally well adjusted person who’s capable of seeing a different letter and not blowing a gasket.

    • @apostrofail
      link
      6
      edit-2
      29 days ago

      I support.

      Æsþetically it looks dense & unique like ð rare, sunderly dental fricative sounds English makes. “ð” isn’t historic since Old English really didn’t boðer ƿiþ separating voiced vs. unvoiced dental, but ðat’s okay since our broðers up norþ in Iceland use ðese 2 characters in ð manner you prescribe. I like ð mirroring a as ð single-character definite vs. indefinite article too. As someone around ESL (English as a second language) speakers, it can help ðem not only knoƿ hƿich sound to make hƿile preventing silly slip-ups like former US president Donald Trump saying Þighland instead of Thailand—but it ƿould be obvious if our ƿritten form ƿasn’t forced to drop þorn for overloading “y” or “th” for ð printing press’ limitations not built for our tongue.

      Before computers or printing presses, ƿe didn’t have spellcheck—so folks spelled ƿords as ðey sound. Having less digraphs favoring more single characters is considered more ergonomic; Dvorak, ð keyboard layout, has “ht” on the home roƿ of ð dominant hand to shoƿ just hoƿ dominant ðis digraph truly is for typing English.

      • Mr. Satan
        link
        fedilink
        4129 days ago

        Look, english spelling is already a mess for me to parse (non-native speaker). If y’all start using this other alphabet, I’m just not gonna bother reading.

        “Oh no! Anyway” kind of comment, but I must protest somehow.

        • Flying Squid
          link
          2929 days ago

          Yeah, I think this is a pretty shitty way to behave on a website with a large number of non-native English speakers.

          • _NoName_
            link
            fedilink
            529 days ago

            I think the real shitty part is the English itself, not letter changes.

            We could do the nice thing and make an easier language the standard? Spanish maybe? Could also do German. /s

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -1129 days ago

            Do you think it’s shitty for black people in America to use African American English dialect on public forums where non-native speakers could see it? Same deal, just different levels of familiarity. Nothing is forcing anyone to engage with this post, but a lot of people seem to feel a strong enough desire to enforce social conformity that they go out of their way to complain about someone doing something different.

            • Flying Squid
              link
              10
              edit-2
              29 days ago

              No. Not same deal. One is dialect with slang, which is readable, and which you can just easily look up if you don’t know.

              The other is using letters that even most native English speakers can’t parse.

              Also, comparing this person’s nonsense to an ethnic group’s way of speaking is highly offensive. I hope you realize that.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -629 days ago

                No. Not same deal. One is dialect with slang, which is readable, and which you can just easily look up if you don’t know.

                I couldn’t read OP’s post so I looked it up and now I can. All it takes is a little effort, which if you’re not willing to expend you can simply move on.

                The other is using letters that even most native English speakers can’t parse.

                Sure African American English (which is not just slang, but an entire dialect with a different set of grammatical rules) is common and recognizable to most native English speakers now, but there was a time when it was just as inscrutable to them as OP’s post.

                Also, comparing this person’s nonsense to an ethnic group’s way of speaking is highly offensive. I hope you realize that.

                I get that you think you’re being progressive by getting offended on others’ behalf, but all you’re really doing is using that ethnic group’s struggle as a rhetorical device to shame me for having a dissenting opinion. I am comparing them because they are alike in a way that is relevant to my point, not because I think they are identical.

                • Flying Squid
                  link
                  829 days ago

                  I get that you think you’re being progressive by getting offended on others’ behalf

                  What the ever-loving fuck are you talking about?

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    -529 days ago

                    I vaguely recall you saying you were Jewish in an earlier comment, if you’re actually black then I apologize. If not then perhaps you can try asking someone who is African American if they find what I said “highly offensive.”

                    You see OP’s use of Old English as worthy of derision, so you interpreted my comparison as belittling towards AME. I don’t share your aversion to esoteric forms of expression, so my comparison is entirely without malice.

        • @apostrofail
          link
          -429 days ago

          Ban ñ from Spanish! My language does not have this character!

          Non-native speakers tend to mess up dental fricatives in speech as is. This usage is a good reminder as a character for a sound your language doesn’t have… a lot of languages “th” is pronounced as English “t” which implies aspiration like in Thomas. It is just like learning any other non-Romantic language & is literally in Icelandic—not some made-up character.

      • ɔiƚoxɘup
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        29 days ago

        This was a little easier than reading finnegans Wake but not much. Definitely more humorous though. Thank you.

      • Logi
        link
        329 days ago

        Why do you persist in writing “ð” rather than “ðe” for “the”? And… Do you really say æsþetic and not æstetic? Where are you from to do that?

        FWIW, do not support, even as a brother up north. English spelling is broken but there are more glaring problems to fix first.

        • @apostrofail
          link
          2
          edit-2
          29 days ago

          Why should the indefinite article, “a”, a single character but the definite article, “the”, takes 3 chars? You know those that created our more modern English decided to respell could with -ould just for symmetry with would & should (Old English was cūþe, with our boy thorn for a dental fricative ending)—so it isn’t like words never changed to look nicer. Middle English often wrote the “the” as þͤ. /ðə/ is the normal transcription. “ð” without specially markers seems fine: single char for a very common word while indicating that it is a voiced sound (meaning not the unvoiced þ).

          Aesthetic comes from Greek αἰσθητικός. θ is an unvoiced dental fricative (also the symbol in IPA) just like our boy þ (descended from the Futhark ᚦ). All transcriptions of English dialects I found show it with the “th” in pronunciation… so if you aren’t using a unvoiced dental fricative, you would be the weird one. 🙃

          I would agree that fixing the vowels should be a higher priority. But English does not fit a five-vowel system like most Latin languages whose letters were shoehorned onto English. The only way to fix it (ignoring the dialectal splits) would be to either invent an entirely new writing system or going back to the system prior to Latin script adoption since the old system more properly encoded English sounds with few diagraphs & many more vowels to work with. In the latter case you would go for the Anglo-Saxon runes brought to the British Isles by the Angles, Saxons, & Jutes. With modernization, I would support this too tho 😅

          • Logi
            link
            029 days ago

            Right, so you’re just arbitrarily changing words. That’s very nice.

            • @apostrofail
              link
              4
              edit-2
              28 days ago

              In recent years tho & thru have been increasingly more common than though & through. Common words tend to do this—the is a top-10 usage word in English. Makes sense.

              Look on how you go from Latin ET/et to &. Turns a common word into a single symbol. Or similar a (and an) coming from Old English ān with cognates in Old Frisian, German, Norse, Saxon, and Gothic with forms like “ein” further being reduced.

              If there is a historical precendence for this happening, there is no reason to assume the language’s writing would not, could not, or should not evolve similarly.

        • @apostrofail
          link
          128 days ago

          They are weirder ones for sure since they look like Ps without extra training. But just slapping two Vs or Us together like the Romans is a hack compared to the historic ƿ (from Runic ᚹ).

          But even stranger is why on Earth were “hw” flipped by printing press folks after hundreds of years with the h first due to pronunciation… I wouldn’t be surprised if the voiceless labial–velar fricative went out of fashion based the new spelling to where many (maybe most) speakers don’t differentiate between “w” & “wh”.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -329 days ago

      You don’t get it, I find it annoying so you should cater to me. STOP HAVING FUN BECAUSE I FEEL EXCLUDED!!!1!1!1

      /s