I've heard ugly rumours about Spanish being written without diacritics in the US, both on computers and on shop signs etc. Can this really be true?
Spanish written without diacritics in the US?
Is it true that in USA there are many blacks? I thought that blacks in movies were not real.
I asked the mirror who is the most handsome white man and it said " you are".
Well, yes and no. I've seen Spanish written with and without them. The common excuse for not having the marks on computer generated material is that they "don't know how" to insert them.
At hospitals almost all signs have the marks because the owners of the hospital (private, gov't, etc.) don't want any misunderstandings at ALL.
At hospitals almost all signs have the marks because the owners of the hospital (private, gov't, etc.) don't want any misunderstandings at ALL.
Same thing happens to the Firefox dictionary, that doesn't detect words written without diacritics as spelling mistakes.
I wonder what kind of uneducated dunce told them it is ok to write without diacritics in Spanish
I wonder what kind of uneducated dunce told them it is ok to write without diacritics in Spanish
It's sad, it's like the US voluntarily admitting they are dumb and imperalist rednecks.
<English ' is a diacritic too. >>
But computers (keypunches) have had apostrophes since the days of 6-bit BCD/BCDIC codes, so there's no problem writing them in the US.
i
Back in the day, before computers were popular, they used to use the diaeresis in printed English books, to distinguish words lile "coop" from "coop", and sometimes they had them in words like oocyte, Bootes, naive, and vacuum. My high school chemistry book had the diaeresis in coordinate (bonds), for example.
I've even seen grave accents used to distinguish "learned" from "learned". Sometimes the there was an acute accent to distinguish "resume" from "resume".
All of this is gone. Nowadays, we even write "El Nino" and "La Nina" for the two extreme phases of the southern oscillation.
Accent marks are for wimps, anyway. In written English, you just have to figure out which form is meant based on the context, without accent mark clues. It's no worse than "read" vs "read", "contract" vs "contract", etc.
But computers (keypunches) have had apostrophes since the days of 6-bit BCD/BCDIC codes, so there's no problem writing them in the US.
i
Back in the day, before computers were popular, they used to use the diaeresis in printed English books, to distinguish words lile "coop" from "coop", and sometimes they had them in words like oocyte, Bootes, naive, and vacuum. My high school chemistry book had the diaeresis in coordinate (bonds), for example.
I've even seen grave accents used to distinguish "learned" from "learned". Sometimes the there was an acute accent to distinguish "resume" from "resume".
All of this is gone. Nowadays, we even write "El Nino" and "La Nina" for the two extreme phases of the southern oscillation.
Accent marks are for wimps, anyway. In written English, you just have to figure out which form is meant based on the context, without accent mark clues. It's no worse than "read" vs "read", "contract" vs "contract", etc.
>>It's no worse than "read" vs "read", "contract" vs "contract", etc.<<
I see your point. English is already very fucked-up!
I see your point. English is already very fucked-up!
The apostrophe is not a diacritic, because if you paid attention you'd see it doesn't sit above or below or attached to any letter. Most English speakers struggle with correct use of the apostrophe though, it has to be said.
Context provides all the answers you need for disambiguation, el Quenoco, so really it's the manufactured spelling in diacritic-intensive languages that are "fucked up", as you so eloquently put it, because all those diacritics actually are not necessary.
Context provides all the answers you need for disambiguation, el Quenoco, so really it's the manufactured spelling in diacritic-intensive languages that are "fucked up", as you so eloquently put it, because all those diacritics actually are not necessary.