From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

"Dot the 'i's and cross the 't's " is a phrase of a bygone era when when
people used to put pen to paper. These days it's all done for you by the keyboard.

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What
added value does a dot have?

[I have no problem with crossing the 't's. No cross means there is a
potential issue with differentiating between a handwritten 't' and an
'l'. ]


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

Le 18/05/2026 |a 08:06, occam a |-crit :

"Dot the 'i's and cross the 't's " is a phrase of a bygone era when when people used to put pen to paper. These days it's all done for you by the keyboard.

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What
added value does a dot have?

[I have no problem with crossing the 't's. No cross means there is a potential issue with differentiating between a handwritten 't' and an
'l'. ]

Google's working well here, outside the EU, and tells me that the dot
was added to i by 11th-Century scribes, because the letter was not
otherwise distinct in the script of the time, which consisted largely of vertical strokes.

<https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:720/format:webp/0*GO4QmQ4W5ltrnmtg.jpeg>

It was initially a small slanted dash, then shrank to a dot.

Serviteur, monsieur.

IMHO, it isn't troublesome, in the way accents are, because it's a fixed
and integral part of the letter.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english


occam <occam@nowhere.nix> posted:

"Dot the 'i's and cross the 't's " is a phrase of a bygone era when when people used to put pen to paper. These days it's all done for you by the keyboard.

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What
added value does a dot have?

Do we have any Turks here? They can explain.

[I have no problem with crossing the 't's. No cross means there is a potential issue with differentiating between a handwritten 't' and an
'l'. ]

--
athel

Living in Marseilles for 39 years; mainly in England before that,
with long periods in Singapore, California, Chile and Canada
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

Den 18.05.2026 kl. 09.06 skrev occam:

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What
added value does a dot have?

It makes the i distinguishable. Without it the i could blend with a neighbouring letter and look like something else.

ri =~ n
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

Den 18.05.2026 kl. 10.07 skrev Bertel Lund Hansen:

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What
added value does a dot have?

It makes the i distinguishable. Without it the i could blend with a neighbouring letter and look like something else.

-a-a-a-a-a ri =~ n

I just remembered: I learned in school that it was okay to write a small
line over the u's so they wouldn't look like v's or i's with a forgotten
dot. I didn't consider it necessary and haven't used it, but many people
at the time did.
--
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english


Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> posted:

Den 18.05.2026 kl. 09.06 skrev occam:

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What added value does a dot have?

It makes the i distinguishable. Without it the i could blend with a neighbouring letter and look like something else.

ri =~ n

That happens in print anyway with some combinations, like rn -> m
--
athel

Living in Marseilles for 39 years; mainly in England before that,
with long periods in Singapore, California, Chile and Canada
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 18/05/2026 09:39, athel.cb@gmail.com wrote:

occam <occam@nowhere.nix> posted:

"Dot the 'i's and cross the 't's " is a phrase of a bygone era when when
people used to put pen to paper. These days it's all done for you by the
keyboard.

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What
added value does a dot have?

Do we have any Turks here? They can explain.

The only one we had - Yusuf B Gursey - passed away . (Turks have both i
and -#. But then the modern Turkish alphabet is an afterthought, part of
their 1928 Reform. )

[I have no problem with crossing the 't's. No cross means there is a
potential issue with differentiating between a handwritten 't' and an
'l'. ]

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

Op 18/05/2026 om 11:43 schreef occam:

On 18/05/2026 09:39, athel.cb@gmail.com wrote:

occam <occam@nowhere.nix> posted:

"Dot the 'i's and cross the 't's " is a phrase of a bygone era when when >>> people used to put pen to paper. These days it's all done for you by the >>> keyboard.

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What
added value does a dot have?

Do we have any Turks here? They can explain.

The only one we had - Yusuf B Gursey - passed away . (Turks have both i
and -#. But then the modern Turkish alphabet is an afterthought, part of their 1928 Reform. )

And on the contrary, I'm missing the dot on capital I, what with the I
and l messed up in sans serif.
--
guido wugi
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english


occam <occam@nowhere.nix> posted:

On 18/05/2026 09:39, athel.cb@gmail.com wrote:

occam <occam@nowhere.nix> posted:

"Dot the 'i's and cross the 't's " is a phrase of a bygone era when when >> people used to put pen to paper. These days it's all done for you by the >> keyboard.

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What
added value does a dot have?

Do we have any Turks here? They can explain.

The only one we had - Yusuf B Gursey - passed away .

I dislike the term "passed away" at the best of times, for example in reference to dying in one's sleep while in bed, but I find it particularly absurd in relation to a hit-and-run car accident -- if indeed it was an accident.

(Turks have both i

and -#. But then the modern Turkish alphabet is an afterthought, part of their 1928 Reform. )

[I have no problem with crossing the 't's. No cross means there is a
potential issue with differentiating between a handwritten 't' and an
'l'. ]

--
athel

Living in Marseilles for 39 years; mainly in England before that,
with long periods in Singapore, California, Chile and Canada
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 18/05/2026 12:00, guido wugi wrote:

Op 18/05/2026 om 11:43 schreef occam:

On 18/05/2026 09:39, athel.cb@gmail.com wrote:

occam <occam@nowhere.nix> posted:

"Dot the 'i's and cross the 't's " is a phrase of a bygone era when
when
people used to put pen to paper. These days it's all done for you by
the
keyboard.

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What >>>> added value does a dot have?

Do we have any Turks here? They can explain.

The only one we had - Yusuf B Gursey - passed away .-a (Turks have both i
and -#. But then the modern Turkish alphabet is an afterthought, part of
their 1928 Reform. )

And on the contrary, I'm missing the dot on capital I, what with the I
and l messed up in sans serif.

Guido, you should take up Turkish, which has I & -# (as well as the lower
case versions):

From Wiki:

"Turkish language, consisting of 29 letters, seven of which (|c, -R, I, -#,
|u, +R and |L) have been modified from their Latin originals for the
phonetic requirements of the language."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 18/05/2026 12:00, guido wugi wrote:

Op 18/05/2026 om 11:43 schreef occam:

On 18/05/2026 09:39, athel.cb@gmail.com wrote:

occam <occam@nowhere.nix> posted:

"Dot the 'i's and cross the 't's " is a phrase of a bygone era when
when
people used to put pen to paper. These days it's all done for you by
the
keyboard.

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What >>>> added value does a dot have?

Do we have any Turks here? They can explain.

The only one we had - Yusuf B Gursey - passed away .-a (Turks have both i
and -#. But then the modern Turkish alphabet is an afterthought, part of
their 1928 Reform. )

And on the contrary, I'm missing the dot on capital I, what with the I
and l messed up in sans serif.

Guido, you should take up Turkish, which has I & -# (as well as the lower
case versions):

From Wiki:

"Turkish language, consisting of 29 letters, seven of which (|c, -R, I, -#,
|u, +R and |L) have been modified from their Latin originals for the
phonetic requirements of the language."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

On 18/05/2026 14:16, occam wrote:


[This duplicate message sent in error. Thunderbird used to have a
'Cancel Message' option, which appears not to be there any-?more.]



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:

On 18/05/2026 14:16, occam wrote:

[This duplicate message sent in error. Thunderbird used to have a
'Cancel Message' option, which appears not to be there any?more.]

There was no point in having it any longer,
because almost all newsservers ignore cancel messages.
(because of abuses)

Jan

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

Le 18/05/2026 |a 08:28, Hibou a |-crit :

Google's working well here, outside the EU, and tells me that the dot
was added to i by 11th-Century scribes, because the letter was not
otherwise distinct in the script of the time, which consisted largely of vertical strokes.

<https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:720/ format:webp/0*GO4QmQ4W5ltrnmtg.jpeg>

It was initially a small slanted dash, then shrank to a dot. [...]

I thought I'd better checkrCa

"The dot first appears in manuscripts of about the 11th century and was
used to distinguish the letter and assist reading in words in which it
was in close proximity to letters such as n or m (inimicis, for
example). The dot frequently took the form of a dash" - <https://www.britannica.com/topic/I-letter>

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

Op 18/05/2026 om 14:16 schreef occam:

On 18/05/2026 12:00, guido wugi wrote:

Op 18/05/2026 om 11:43 schreef occam:

On 18/05/2026 09:39, athel.cb@gmail.com wrote:

occam <occam@nowhere.nix> posted:

"Dot the 'i's and cross the 't's " is a phrase of a bygone era when
when
people used to put pen to paper. These days it's all done for you by >>>>> the
keyboard.

That being said - I cannot see why we ever needed to dot the eyes? What >>>>> added value does a dot have?

Do we have any Turks here? They can explain.

The only one we had - Yusuf B Gursey - passed away .-a (Turks hav|ee both i >>> and -#. But then the modern Turkish alphabet is an afterthought, part of >>> their 1928 Reform. )

And on the contrary, I'm missing the dot on capital I, what with the I
and l messed up in sans serif.

Guido, you should take up Turkish, which has I & -# (as well as the lower case versions):

Yes I knew. But it ought to be standard in "our" languages.

From Wiki:

"Turkish language, consisting of 29 letters, seven of which (|c, -R, I, -#, |u, +R and |L) have been modified from their Latin originals for the
phonetic requirements of the language."

Other capital dilemmas: with or without accents?
French:
Ev|-que or |ev|?que, |etre, |eglefin?
Spanish:
Aguila or |Uguila?
--
g|c|Ad|A w|Lg|i
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

occam hat am 18.05.2026 um 14:20 geschrieben:

On 18/05/2026 14:16, occam wrote:

[This duplicate message sent in error. Thunderbird used to have a
'Cancel Message' option, which appears not to be there any-?more.]

Don't worry. Even when Thunderbird had it, it NEVER worked.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.usage.english

wugi <wugi@brol.invalid> wrote or quoted:

Yes I knew. But it ought to be standard in "our" languages.

FWIW,

*********************** WISDOM OF THE CHATBOT **************************

The dot on the lowercase letter "i" was invented during the
Middle Ages to solve a major legibility crisis in cursive
handwriting.

During the 11th century, a thick, tightly spaced style of
handwriting known as Gothic script (and earlier, Carolingian
minuscule) became popular among European scribes. In these
scripts, letters like i, u, m, n, and v were all written using
the exact same basic downstroke, called a minim.

Because scribes wrote quickly and crammed letters together,
a series of minims became almost impossible to read.
For instance, a word like "mimi" (mimes) or "numinum" (of the
deities) just looked like an unbroken, confusing picket fence
of identical vertical lines. Scribes frequently misread words,
confusing an "iu" for an "vi," or an "in" for an "mi."

To rescue readers from this visual confusion, 11th-century
scribes began placing a small accent mark over the lowercase
"i" to signal, "Hey, this specific vertical stroke is a vowel,
not part of an m or an n".

The mark didn't start as a dot. It began as a small slash
resembling an acute accent (-|) or a tiny crescent moon.

By the 15th and 16th centuries, with the invention of the
printing press and the rise of Roman typefaces, typography
standardized this messy slash into the clean, round dot we
recognize today.

The formal typographic name for the dot over the "i" (and
later, the letter "j") is the tittle. It originates from the
Latin word titulus, which means an inscription or a heading.

The letter "j" didn't exist originally; it started simply as a
cursive flourish or variant of the letter "i". When "j"
eventually became recognized as its own distinct consonant,
it inherited the tittle from its parent letter.

*********************** WISDOM OF THE CHATBOT **************************

My latin teacher placed a bent horizontal line over his "u"s,
as in "+!", which he learned when using an older type of script,
where a sequence of e, n, m and u, looks all just like /|/|/|/...


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2