On Wed, 10 Jan 1996, Adam TWARDOCH #1 wrote:
> > a mistake here. it isn't actually an accent at all. it is
> > part of the letter: check with dictionaries in said languages. however
> > in Polish it is an accent. circle?
> There are no "open" round bullets ("circles") in Polish.
sorry, git muddledm, i was thinking partly of
the czech `u with circle accent' and the curious omission
of the polish ogonek. i conflated the two things unadvertantly.
apologies for any confusion or insults to national sensibilities.
naturally this area has been ploughed by PolishTeXies, notably
Jackowski, Holdys & Rycko in `with TeX to the Poles' (it's
a play on words), in TeX, applications, uses, methods,
1990, isbn 0-13-912296-6.
> The last thing to be said about Polish diacritrics is, that the letters
> "aogonek", "eogonek", "Aogonek", "Eogonek" are solid letters and not
> composed characters, because "ogonek" is NOT AN ACCENT, it's just
> a part of the letter.
i accept everthing you say here, but by having a term 'ogonek', or
'little tail', it strongly suggests in the minds of the hoi-polloi
like myself that it is, if not an accent, then an addition, a modifier
of an existing letter, which of course is what the circle on an scandinavian
A looks like to the unintiated, and isn't.
i am so pleased that english had the good sense not to use diacrits
(unless you consider the dot on i and j to be diacrits).
malcolm clark tel: (+44) 01203 523365
computing services fax: (+44) 01203 523267
university of warwick url: http://www.warwick.ac.uk/~cudax/egotrip.html
coventry, cv4 7al, uk email: [log in to unmask]
"none but ourselves can free our minds" r.marley