0

As part of learning the language, I've noticed that ligatures such as æ and œ are no longer common in English. The ligatures are said to be primarily eschewed in favour of the digraphs ae or oe (mayhap due to technological limitations such as in use of typewriters and ASCII); however, they are not common either in handwritten English. Moreover, Unicode allows us to easily insert such graphemes while typing (e.g. to type those letters on Windows you would press Alt+0198 and Alt+0230 for Æ, and Alt+0140 and Alt+0156 for Œ).

Archæology is now more usually written as archaeology. Even in American English it is common to see the word spelled archeology, completely omitting the a.

Why is this?

Would it be still right to use a ligature for, e.g., supernovæ instead of supernovae?

Having observed other languages such as French, Danish, Norwegian, etc. I can say that ligatures are still common elsewhere. In French, for example, æ’s are mainly replaced with accents, but œ’s are very common in words such as cœur, sœur, œuvre, etc.

Of course, personally and subjectively, I consider ligatures to be beautiful and elegant, which add yet another matt flavour to the English language.

tchrist
  • 134,759
Veo
  • 449
  • 1
    Ligatures: A Guide to their Proper and Improper Use: http://www.scribendi.com/advice/a_guide_to_the_proper_and_improper_use_of_ligatures.en.html –  Oct 21 '15 at 07:24
  • Well, it definitely seems wrong to me to use a ligature where two vowel letters represent distinct sounds, as in the Classical names Pasiphae and Danae. On the other hand, in these cases, it is possible to use a diæresis: Pasiphaë, Danaë. (Weird examples, but they're the first that popped into my mind.) – herisson Oct 21 '15 at 07:28
  • How do I type them in on a standard keyboard? – Brian Hooper Oct 21 '15 at 07:40
  • 1
    @BrianHooper On Windows, press Alt+0198 and Alt+0230 for Æ. Alt+0140 and Alt+0156 for Œ. – Veo Oct 21 '15 at 07:43
  • @Ven, I tried numerous times to do this using a variety of applications, with a uniform lack of success. The solution here was helpful, but in any event, I think that answers your question. – Brian Hooper Oct 21 '15 at 07:52
  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because Josh61's swift answer shows a little research could largely answer, the monolithic answers at his related linked ELU article fill in the background, and it boils down to a matter of opinion (CMOS recommends that ...). – Edwin Ashworth Oct 21 '15 at 08:20
  • @EdwinAshworth What is being asked in the question is why has the usage of ligatures decreased and if it is still correct to use them. – Veo Oct 21 '15 at 08:23
  • 'with modern printing and desktop publishing, ligatures are rarely used. When they are, it is simply out of stylistic preference.' (scribendi) // The Encyclopædia Britannica actually has that lexical ligature in its registered trademark, and so must be maintained. And IPA uses both œ and ɶ (the small caps version) to mean separate vowels; you mustn’t mess with those. All those are lexical ligatures.... – Edwin Ashworth Oct 21 '15 at 08:29
  • For other cases in English, the style has largely shifted, although it does still depend to some degree on the publication and nation of origin. Where we once wrote œnophile and amœba, Cæsar and archæology, we tend now to write those with the letters ‘broken apart’, so to speak. (@tchrist) // As to why: doubtless aesc and ethel are seen as unwieldy anachronisms in non-specialist contexts. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 21 '15 at 08:30
  • 1
    At least in Britain we do still tend to preserve the two letters (whilst America has largely abolished even that practice). e.g. We have foetus and encyclopaedia so spelled - which retains something of the elegance of the ligatures. Personally I still observe them if I am writing by hand - which sadly is not often these days. – WS2 Oct 21 '15 at 08:45
  • "yet another matt flavour" Not sure what you mean by "matt", here. In English, "Matt" isn't a word; at best, it's just a nickname for "Mathew". – Parthian Shot Oct 21 '15 at 09:39
  • @ParthianShot "matt" is a word. It's an alternative spelling of "matte".http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/matt – Phil M Jones Oct 21 '15 at 09:55
  • @PhilMJones Fair enough. I've just never seen that spelling of "matte". – Parthian Shot Oct 21 '15 at 09:56
  • @ParthianShot It is almost ubiquitous on tins of matt paint, e.g. https://www.dulux.co.uk/en/products/matt – Phil M Jones Oct 21 '15 at 09:58
  • Yes, well, it is an alternative spelling of matte. – Veo Oct 23 '15 at 07:03

0 Answers0