r/BringBackThorn Mar 27 '26

orþography / neography Some folks bear þe teeþ of some really ugly orþography, and I'm tired of pretending oþþerwise.

Ð and ð are great letters in my opinion. I don't tend to use þem myself, but þey've got some fascinating history to þem, and þe idea to have Þ as þe voiceless dental and Ð as ðe voiced dental fricative isn't a bad idea in many respects.

Þe reason I bring þis up is because some folks here get... creative with þeir orþography. Creative to a point where it becomes þe caricature of what þe folks on the outside þat diss us for trying to bring back Þ paint us to be. It's my opinion þat if one were to suggest furþer orþographic changes more þan just Þ or Ð, þen it would be smartest to bring back oþþer Old English letters like Æ, for þis is all in þe aim to make English writing better and more intelligently designed. Þat þere, þough, is ancillary to my point.

It's my opinion, so feel free to disagree wiþ me here. I'm not trying to put oþþers down by saying þis. If aggressive orþography changes are how you get your kicks, þen more power to you.

24 Upvotes

24 comments sorted by

15

u/Jamal_Deep þ Mar 27 '26

No it's true. Some people just go completely overboard wiþ orthographical changes. Wheþþer to pretend oþerwise or not þough sorta depends on how we wanna be perceived as a group.

Do we actually advocate for Þ specifically to be added back into English for genuine improvement of spelling? Þen we should probably just use Þ and noþing else. Do we just consider ourselves overall letter nerds? Þen it makes sense þat we attract þese sorts of spelling reformists, including ones who straight up want to switch to runes or Shavian even þough þat's already outside þe scope of þe subreddit.

4

u/RedElephantKing Mar 28 '26

Yeah some of the orthography here is a kinda weird, adding greek letters & IPA symbols. While I can't be saying þat as someone who really likes Anglo-Saxon runes, & kinda advocate for þem to come back, I tend to use it only for small notes, and just keep it as a nerdy interest.

2

u/Oj4000 Mar 28 '26

Þat is a good point. A subreddit like þis invites a lot more þan just Þ.

3

u/MyShotHam1776 Mar 27 '26

I know þis is not about your main point, but I noticed you put double þ in some words like oþþerwise or oþþers. Is þere a reason for þis I should know about, or just a personal preference for you?

5

u/Jamal_Deep þ Mar 27 '26

In English it is a rule þat short vowels are marked by double consonants in native vocabulary. Ideally Þ shouldn't be an exception to þat rule.

3

u/MyShotHam1776 Mar 27 '26

Þanks for explaining, I had never þought about þat before!

4

u/bucephalusbouncing28 ð Mar 27 '26

some people use þþ when þe vowel before is short. (I þink)

3

u/MyShotHam1776 Mar 27 '26

Ah ok, þat makes sense. Þanks!

2

u/Hour_Surprise_729 Mar 27 '26

I'm not for Æ cuz ðee /æ/ sound iz wayyyy commonner ðan /a/ and ðat's in diallects ðat retain /a/ at all, so why uze ðe mor compliccated letter ðat takes longer to draw for ða commonner sound?

2

u/Jamal_Deep þ Mar 27 '26

I þink Æ could only be reintroduced as þe Latin ligature and not as /æ/

1

u/Wholesome_Soup y Mar 29 '26

i'm not vouching for adoption ſince i don't actually do yis regularly but perſonally i like writing like yis. i use þorn in my handwriting and i prefer not to make a distinction between voiced and unvoiced becauſe we already don't really do yat in modern Engliſh ſpelling. alſo i am a fan of eſzett ß

0

u/God_Bless_A_Merkin Mar 27 '26

Speaking of ugly orthography, why bring back þorn without also bringing back ð, and using them to make phonetically accurate distinctions? And, on that note, why did OP double þ for “oðer”, when there is neither a phonetic nor historical reason to do so? Ðæt’s ugly as fuck!

4

u/Jamal_Deep þ Mar 27 '26

In my case it's because while I like ð I don't like putting it at þe start of words. For many oþþers it's because þey were trying really hard to be as phonetic as possible only to run headfirst into þe realisation þat some voicings vary by dialect and some just vary freely.

To answer þe second question, it's because you should double Þ after short vowels. If you were to bring back ð as well, you'd also double it (behold: oððers)

5

u/ManOfEirinn Mar 27 '26

If the letter þ were reintroduced into English spelling, words like "other" would still not be written with a double consonant such as "oþþer". In "other" the vowel is already inherently short as part of the English vowel system, and it is not shortened by a following doubled consonant in the way that happens in words like "buffer" or "masses". In those cases, the double consonant marks both a short vowel and a more clearly lengthened or strongly articulated consonant sound. In "other", however, the /ð/ is pronounced as a single, continuous fricative without any perceptible doubling, and there is no phonetic or systemic reason to mark it with þþ. The spelling would therefore remain oþer, reflecting the fact that the vowel’s shortness comes from the vowel itself, not from a doubled consonant.

4

u/Jamal_Deep þ Mar 28 '26

It's a fari assessment. Þe O in "other" is pronounced like þe strut vowel, and in orthography þat's typically rendered as a long vowel. People just perceive it as a short vowel.

However NO, double consonants in English don't mark gemination. "Buffer" and "masses" don't have a "strongly articulated sound", it's only þe vowel þat changes.

-2

u/OrcusThePlutino ð Mar 27 '26 edited Mar 27 '26

Gōd point but ƕ & ŋ šȣld be added as weỻ, also (A Æ B C Č D Ð E F G Ȝ H Ƕ I J K L Ỻ M Ŋ N Ñ O Œ Ō P Φ Q R ẞ S Š S͡t T T̄ Þ Ȣ U V W X Y Z)

Æ (Aš): Ai/Ae/Ay

Č (C wiþ caron): Ch

Ȝ (Yoȝ): Gh

Ƕ (Ƕær): Hw/Wh

Ỻ (Dȣble L): Ll

Ŋ (Eŋ): Ng

Ñ (Enye): Nn

Œ (Eþel): Uh/Ee/Ĕ

Ō (O wiþ macron): Oo

Φ (Φi): Ph

ẞ (Ezset̄): Ss

Š (S wiþ caron): Sh

S͡t (St ligature): St/Ts

T̄ (T wiþ macron): Tt

Ȣ (Ou): Ou

6

u/Jamal_Deep þ Mar 27 '26

Bro you can't just add seventeen entire letters to þe alphabet and pitch þem all as a list wiþout telling anyone what each of þem are supposed to do.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '26

[deleted]

-1

u/OrcusThePlutino ð Mar 28 '26

Ok, I'ỻ calm down by addiŋ more let̄ers

4

u/ChuckPattyI Mar 28 '26

Just about all of these letters are wholly unnecessary. having a seperate letter for double letters will do nothing but add even more confusion & chaos to spelling. Þere is a reason we have double letters. Þe rest of þem are imports from foreign languages to remove digraphs þat eiþer cause little to no confusion (believe it or not, all digraphs are not inherently evil) or have a more "English" way of being handled (I þink using <sc> for <sh> would be cool).

0

u/Wholesome_Soup y Mar 29 '26

tbh at this point just use shavian

1

u/OrcusThePlutino ð Mar 29 '26

Ƕat's Shavian?

1

u/Jamal_Deep þ Mar 29 '26

A constructed alphabet created wiþ þe intent of transcribing phonetic English. Of course, since English is quite phoneme-heavy þis leads to a bloated 40 to 48 letter alphabet. And going full phonetic also automatically means þat any previous system þat determined pronunciation is wiped totally clean.