Talk:IJ (digraph)

message: :It is referred to as the 'long Y' in the Dutch language, and contrasts with the 'short Y' ei, which in most dialects is pronounced identically. The letter Y only occurs in loanwords…
That statement is misleading or at least confusing; there is no reason to replace IJ by Y here.
—Herbee 13:24, 2004 Mar 18 (UTC)
:More clear now I hope. — Jor (Darkelf) 13:56, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: When I needed a title for this article I chose 'Dutch Y', because in Dutch it is just called the "IJ", and replaces the Y as a letter of the alphabet. Other possible titles are 'IJ ligature', and of course 'Dutch IJ'. No objection to moving it (keeping a redirect from 'Dutch Y'). — Jor (Darkelf) 21:45, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Y or IJ 

message: As far as I know (and I'm a native speaker), the ĳ in vrolĳk is always pronounced as a schwa, and never as ii. The ĳ in the word bĳzonder is pronounced as ii, but it is also the only case I know of. So probably this needs to be refined, or another example of ĳ being pronounced as ii in standard Dutch has to be found (except of course for words als bijzonderheid).--Berteun 12:50, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the ij in vrolijk sounds like schwa, however in sound it's more close to i (as in knights who say ni) than to ei. If you listen to sound records from before the 60's, then you'll sometimes hear people say vrolik and also in older writings you can find it written as vrolik, like you can find schrikte. (my apologees, only Dutch and people who studied Dutch might understand this and then perhaps even those wouldn't if they haven't seen older literature). Also in Flemish you'll still hear vrolik... however it it not pronounced as vroliek (vroliik), of course. Frenzie 17:34, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  vrolijk 

message: The article opens with "Ĳ (also IJ)", but on my system, with the default font the two are rendered identically, as though it said, "IJ (also IJ)", which looks pretty silly. Just letting you know. --Furrykef 00:25, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  digraph rendering 

message: I propose that we simply not use the digraph character and just use the letters I and J to spell IJ. The two are going to be rendered identically in most fonts anyway, which ties into the "wrongtitle" thing above, mainly, it may well not make any sense until you look at the wiki code or until you try to select one of the two characters only to find it's one character. Of course we could still note that there's a Unicode codepoint for it. - furrykef (Talk at me) 12:26, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You hit the nail right on the head, Furrykef. Someone who considers ĳ one letter, will use i and j over his dead body. This is exactly what the discussion is about.Marc1966 (talk) 23:11, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Get rid of the digraph? 

message: In medieval times, before the letter j emerged as a distinct letter, a series of letters i in Roman numerals was commonly ended with a flourish; hence they actually looked like ij, iij, iiij, etc. This proved useful in preventing fraud, as it was impossible, for example, to add another i to vij to get viij. This practice is now merely an antiquarian's note; it is never used. (It did, however, lead to the Dutch diphthong IJ.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruud Koot (talk • contribs) 21:30, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "ij" and "iij" is still written in liturgical books to mark repetition (twice or thrice) - such as "Kyrie eleison iij." 89.176.17.112 (talk) 01:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of IJ 

message: The IJ ligature in Unicode is only intended to be compatible with legacy processing systems.  Since Wikipedia isn't a legacy processing system, the IJ ligature should not be used in the wikipedia article.
From Unicode 4.0 standard, page 71-72:
• Compatibility decomposable characters are a subset of compatibility characters included in the Unicode Standard to represent distinctions in other base standards.  They support transmission and processing of legacy data. Their use is discouraged other than for legacy data or other special circumstances.
• Replacing a compatibility decomposable character by its compatibility decomposition may lose round-trip convertibility with a base standard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.132.163.208 (talk) 00:33, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  IJ and Unicode 

message: It says: in the handwriting of most Dutch speakers ÿ and ij are identical. I don't think that is correct. Look at these typical examples: http://www.let.rug.nl/~kleiweg/ij.html
The first word bijou has two letters i and j. The second word ijs has one letter ij, and the word yoghurt has one letter y. -- 213.84.55.218 23:02, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My ij and y are clearly different (as on the example you linked to), only the ij is so into my system that I often write the y as ij and can only just keep myself from adding the dots. But that is a mistake and rather the opposite of what the i-grec is. Frenzie 17:34, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Handwriting 

message: If it is noted that the name is ij lange (long ij) to distinguish it from short ij, I think that the transcription shall be with long sign (:) as [] not only [].
Please answer to me also at my catalan user talk. THANKS—Ludor 15:12, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Short answer: the names are based on the letter form, not the underlying sound (which is identical in most cases). Longer answer at your talk. Jordi·✆ 16:07, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  long IJ vs Short IJ 

message: Is the Dutch letter ij related to the 18th-century Alsatian German letter ÿ?
Did this letter exist in the dialect of German spoken in Alsace in the 1700's?
Some of my ancestors came from Alsace, and I did a lot of genealogical research.  I can verify that the following spellings are quite clear in both printing and handwriting in the church record books in the late 1700's and very early 1800's:
* Xaverÿ  ( = High German “Xaver”, English “Xavier”)
* Himerÿ  ( = French “Himère”, High German “Immer” or “Imer”, Latin “Himerius”)
* Antonÿ  ( = High German “Anton", English “Anthony”, Latin “Antonius”)
* Kirÿ  (a surname)
The record-keepers occasionally forgot the umlaut and just wrote y instead of ÿ, but they never wrote it as ij.
To add to my confusion, one of the Alsatian record-keepers spelled the number zwei as zwiÿ on one occasion!
The Alsatian language article is just a stub and not very helpful. Lawrence King 07:23, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Alsatian is an Alemannic dialect and in Alemannic the letter y (which developed from ÿ) stands for /i/ (ee). On the Alemannic wikipedia we recently found out that the y we use actually came from ij. The y is mostly used in Switzerland nowadays, I think most Alsatian writers use ii instead. That zwei is spelled zwiÿ is because iÿ once stood for ei. Hope that helps!--Chlämens 15:05, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Alsatian? 

message: The URL European rules for the use of the IJ in public records is not working; is there a good replacement? -- Psiphiorg 06:43, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  European rules for the use of the IJ in public records 

message: I think ij is a ligature and not a letter, because wether I write bijectie or ijs my ij stays the same and I allways write it as a ligature, never as two distinct letter. If ij be a ligature, shouldn't the ij in bijectie be a ligature?  Because otherwise the word bijectie should look like "bi jectie" in writing?
:I learned it as bi-jectie, never seen anyone write bijectie 85.145.103.163 14:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Technically, there is no ij in bijectie (with or without a hyphen) since the i is in the first sillable and the j is in the second. Richard 14:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: bijectie

message: Is [ɛɪ] the right sound?  I haven't heard Dutch spoken much, but I was sure I heard something more like [ʌ:ɪ], so that ijs sounded pretty much like the usual American pronunciation of "ice."
Not R (talk) 17:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: According to our article on Dutch phonology it should be . This is also in accordance with G. E. Booij (1995), The Phonology of Dutch, Oxford University Press, p. 4.  --Lambiam 20:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: [ɛɪ] is the right sound. But it is as hard for some native speakers as it is for many foreigners. So you may very well have heard sth. like [ʌ:ɪ]. We had a boy in school that moved over from the Amsterdam area, that we made say 'ei' (egg), and we laughed our hearts out. Sorry now, of course. Marc1966 (talk) 23:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  correct IPA rendering? 

message: The intro states: "in most fonts the two composing characters are not connected, but sometimes slightly kerned together." My impression from looking at some older (pre digital typesetting) Dutch books is that the width of "ij" (almost) equals the width of "u". This appears to hold across different fonts. In several digital fonts (e.g. Palatino, Bookman Old Style, Cambria, Arial), however, "u" is markedly (up to 25%) wider than "i" + "j", so any adjustment of the spacing should actually move them slightly apart. Does anyone know of digital fonts that have a single character for "ij" or that apply kerning to "i"+"j", and how the width of "ij" then relates to the sum of the widths of "i" and "j" and to the width of "u"?  --Lambiam 13:22, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kerning 

message: In the last couple of years I've noticed that many people I know often write Y instead of IJ when typing in instant messengers or using SMS language. One of the reasons might be that you save a character (which are limited in SMS messages) each time you use Y instead of IJ, and since it is a common letter you save quite a lot of characters this way. For example "Ga jy vrydag mee eten?" Of course these people still write "IJ" in more formal texts --Lamadude (talk) 00:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't fully see the point. English SMS knows many short cut (C U; LOL etc.) Arnoutf (talk) 21:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Perhaps they are becoming Afrikaans; vrydag and jy are acceptable (indeed only) Afrikaans spellings. ;-) Booshank (talk) 00:15, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writing IJ as Y making a come-back? 

message: The text currently states:
:In Dutch primary schools, ij used to be taught as being the 25th of the alphabet.
I didn't know that it isn't taught as such any more. Can we get a date for when this changed? My primary education was between 1977 and 1983, and it was taught as a single letter to me. – gpvos (talk) 14:51, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My primary education, and specifically when I learned letters, was around 1988 and it wasn't taught as a single letter. It was taught as a combination, much like ei, ie, oe and ch. --Zom-B (talk) 07:51, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it also depends regionally. I was grown up in the west of The Netherlands, while those banners look like they originate from the east (like the one stating Twente) --Zom-B (talk) 07:57, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It was taught to me as being a single letter as well - in the west of the Netherlands, first half of the 1970's. Richard 09:55, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  IJ as single letter in schools in the Netherlands — until when? 

message: In the article, there are two images of the same "leesplankje" (readboard), but with the underlying text claiming two different things.
The first one correctly states that all letters resembling one sound are grouped, like ij, but also oe and ch.
The second one uses a different image of the same object as an argument that ij is one letter, since it is grouped together.
This could be very confusing for anyone who doesn't know Dutch language.
--Harmenator (talk) 21:20, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: In the first image, i and j are grouped, whereas in the second image they are physically joined. Richard 08:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image leesplankje 

message: I have seen the digraph ij in many early music facsimiles and old notation scores, and have always been under the impression that it stood for repetition of the preceding word(s). Does anyone know more about this and would like to expand the article? --Chrysalifourfour (talk) 12:07, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't a diagraph, but instead is just ij or iij. It's either a variant version of the Roman numeral for 2 or 3, depending upon how many times the phrase in repeated, or an abbreviation for idem. See:  —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 13:47, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ij as repetition 

message: Does someone have access to a copy the Winkler Prins or its website? Does its article on IJ literally state that it "is the 25th letter of the Dutch alphabet, placed between X and Y", or was this claim merely inferred from the fact that WP sorts the IJ between X and Y? —Ruud 22:21, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I have here a 6th edition of the Winkler Prins (1954). IJ in there is not sorted between X and Y. Y and IJ are just sorted mixed as being one letter (25th). There is not a separate article on the IJ, only an article on Y which also deals with IJ. It states something like this: "The location of the y in the Dutch alphabet is sometimes also assigned to the ij". Possibly this is different in newer editions. HTH --Ajv39 (talk) 10:14, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winkler Prins 

message: In ZDF documentary Die Deutschen () I saw a panoramic painting for Thomas Müntzer's rebellion, which appears the word "Frijheit", who can explain this? -- Great Brightstar (talk) 20:41, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this the image you're referring to? —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 14:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I think so. -- Great Brightstar (talk) 13:19, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Given the overlap between the area involved in German Peasants' War and Alemanic German, it's likely this is related to the earlier discussion on this page about ij/ÿ in Alsatian. There's a section on ij in the :als:Y article, but I can't read it with enough confidence to say that something should be added to this article (and there's no sourcing on it over there either). —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 18:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Further investigation finds some info in the :de:Y article stating that in Early New High German and Middle Dutch, the long  sound was sometimes rendered as ij as a variant of ii and that ij sometimes that became an ÿ. That is confirmed in the source Grammatisch-Kritisches Wörterbuch der Hochdeutschen Mundart. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 20:07, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use in German?