Talk:Esperanto orthography

message: This article discusses Esperanto orthography in general - including the "h" and "^" systems, not just the x-system - so I propose moving it to Esperanto orthography, which in any case would mean more to non-Esperantists. Any objections? -- Oliver P. 16:45 Feb 17, 2003 (UTC)
: Okay, I've moved it and made separate sections for different systems. Somehow its ended up quite a lot longer than before, despite the fact that I haven't added much. I think my writing style may be too verbose. But hopefully it's clear enough. Please check through it if you have time! -- Oliver P. 20:42 Feb 17, 2003 (UTC)
::I like it.  Good job!  --Chuck SMITH
::: Phew! Thanks. :) Feel free to improve it if you want... I wasn't sure about including the weird capitalisation method, as I've only known one other person who has used it. I used it for a while when corresponding with Martin Howard. (He was for a time the president of the Orienta Federacio, which is the main Esperanto group for East Anglia and its environs.) I can't remember where he said he got it from, but I seem to remember him being very keen on it! I haven't written to him for quite a while, though. I'll try to find the old e-mails where he was telling me about it. -- Oliver P. 21:04 Feb 17, 2003 (UTC)
-- Speaking of h-system, i added an item about the ambiguity of u (can be either u or ŭ). The item i added cites w as an available letter (could be used in h-system or x-system), but i hope it doesn't upset people (yet-another-way-of-writing... :) ). I'm not proposing it, i think people use too many variant spellings (vx??? c' g' u'??? ^c ^g???) and this makes it hard to search the net for Esperanto words... I just wonder why the creator of the x-system didn't use w in the first place. --Yuu en 01:29, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That may be to avoid confusion with actual w, which occasionally may occur in unassimilated proper names, or because w is normally trascribed as <v>, not <ŭ>. kwami 02:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: ASCII transliterations

message: I've created a custom Esperanto keyboard layout for Mac OS X. Would it be inappropriate to link to it in some way on this page, like in External Links? --Bill Du Talk 08:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds fine to me. What was the reason for making a new layout? Mithridates 11:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because I wasn't aware that there was already Esperanto keyboard layouts for Macs, so I made one. I'll be bold and add the link to this page and the main Esperanto article (under the External links section "Input Tools") after I create a page with instructions on how to install the layout that includes the link to download the layout.--Bill Du Talk 09:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mac OS X keyboard layout 

message: The material already exists in the Shavian article and use of the Shavian alphabet with Esperanto is nearly non-existent. This article is about Esperanto orthography and I think that an explanation of Shavian is out of its scope. Also, Shavian was designed for English and the English orthography doesn't mention it. Saying Shavian has been used for Esperanto and providing a link to the Shavian article should be more than enough. - DNewhall 22:35, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, this is totally out of place. I removed the mention from the first paragraph, for starters. --babbage 22:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Section on [[Shavian alphabet]] necessary?

message: Another explanation for the origin of the manual alphabet Z sign in Signuno might be that the number 3 resembles the Cyrillic letter that corresponds to Z. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.76.32.23 (talk) 23:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Non-printed variants

message: Is this just someone's pet project, or is this actually used? 
I've deleted about half the section, which was obviously false or subjective opinion, but we need some source for accepting any of it. — kwami (talk) 22:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You said in the history page that this article was not about reforms and had not to deal with this "modified alphabet". Maybe I shouldn't have used the word "reform" because it is actually not a reform, but the way some people write in Esperanto (at least the one who wrote those lines probably does). In both cases, the few paragraphs in question are still relevant because they are about Esperanto orthography. I won't go any further with this silly game of adding and deleting these paragraphs again and again because it won't sort out the problem. But if you still have any objections to these paragraphs' presence, on which article would you suggest them to appear, instead of this one? — 86.68.8.184 (talk) 00:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Why should they appear anywhere? They're personal idiosyncrasies and not at all notable. For example, I spell the English word probably "prob'ly", since that's how I pronounce it. Should I add that to the English orthography article? People have written English in all sorts of reformed spellings, and most are completely insignificant. Now, if a notable Esperanto author used one of these systems, that would be a different story, but I've seen no evidence that is the case. kwami (talk) 01:13, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure these spelling modifications are only personal idiosyncrasies, as you said. They actually seem to be used by a certain number of people that shouldn't be ignored, as we can see in the history page that several people consider these paragraphs are important: 84.13.198.10, 78.149.138.236, Lothlerarhlichliarmetlialeta. However those three names may refer to the same person... We should ask the person who first wrote it (=84.13.198.10?) what were his reasons to do it and can he testify to the use of these modifications by a notable community? — 86.68.8.184 (talk) 18:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Likely just s.o. pushing a personal project. Not notable enough to warrant even a mention on Eo wiki. No evidence ever presented that it has any notability. I'd left this here earlier to end an edit war with s.o. pushing this, because it was rather harmless, but he was never able to justify it. No evidence presented in the mean time. Time for it to go. kwami (talk) 19:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Modified alphabet" 

message: I often see the names of months capitalized. Is this less common, or is this inroad from English and German the norm? Jchthys cont. 18:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My Plena vortaro does not capitalize the months. I think it probably is an English influence. kwami (talk) 22:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I do think it is an English influence. The lernu! Detala gramatiko, does capitalize the months, as does my Esperanto Ubuntu (though the translation of open-source software is not perfect). Jchthys cont. 23:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization of months 

message: I think there is undue weight given to alternate names for the letters. Yes, there have been lots of reform attempts, including by prominent Esperantists such as Kalocsay. However, in common use these are virtually irrelevant. I propose cutting the entire section on alternate names to this:
Since these names are easily confused, there have been numerous proposals of alternate naming schemes, including one by the writer Kálmán Kalocsay. However, the traditional names ending in o are widely accepted and are the only names in practical use. --N-k (talk) 05:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think your 'however' addition is good. We should be clear about that. However, given that it's Kalocsay, I don't think it's unreasonable for his names to remain. — kwami (talk) 06:09, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names of the letters 

message: I wrote a program that makes typing special characters easier. When you type, it automatically replaces sequences like ,^g ,^h ,uu with the corresponding letters ĝ ĥ ŭ. (You type a comma followed by the characters that you want to combine).
This program can be found at http://catology.boisset.eu/Carlinga. It is free, open source and portable. 
It was originally made for translators and terminologists who need to type in several languages, but I suppose that it can be useful for typing Esperanto.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxbois (talk • contribs) 07:53, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Utility for typing Esperanto 

message: Should we include the example of the IPA like j for you like in those IPA articles?--Kc kennylau (talk) 09:04, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a word. It is easy for English speakers to confuse. — kwami (talk) 10:00, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sound value 

message: Fully half of the article (29k out of 58k bytes) was about ASCII substitutions, reforms, and data-input, which is only tangentially related to orthography and therefor undue per WEIGHT. Those sections are also the ones that tend to bloat over time. I split them off. 
(The split-off material is at Inputting Esperanto text on computers and at Substitutions and reforms of the Esperanto alphabet.) — kwami (talk) 09:09, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split