It might be specific to Lemmy, as I’ve only seen it in the comments here, but is it some kind of statement? It can’t possibly be easier than just writing “th”? And in many comments I see “th” and “þ” being used interchangeably.
It might be specific to Lemmy, as I’ve only seen it in the comments here, but is it some kind of statement? It can’t possibly be easier than just writing “th”? And in many comments I see “th” and “þ” being used interchangeably.
Voiced is like the th in the, unvoiced is like the th in thin.
Unvoiced sounds the same whispered, whereas voiced loses its buzz when you whisper.
Voiced:
this that then with the then breathe bother those though
Unvoiced:
thread thin thanks width breath both youth pithy smith thatch thought throughout thorough
How can I subscribe for more language nuance explanations?
https://historyofenglishpodcast.com/ (Not me, but I enjoyed it a great deal, one of my favourite podcasts ever.)
Why is it that the Dutch press operators that Caxton hired to run his printing presses, seldom catch any blame for the spelling changes they made to English? The one I always remember is Ghost. Those Dutch press operators decided that Gost should look more like the the Dutch word Gheest. So Ghost got it’s “h”. As did ghoul because you wouldn’t that to be too different…And other words got the same treatments. Thankfully many of the changes didn’t stick but enough have.
If only the printing press hadn’t been introduced to English until after the Great Vowel Shift was over, spelling and spoken would be much closer aligned.
The explanation I heard was that “ghost” stuck around because “Holy Ghost” was in the printed bibles and people didn’t question that authority.
Thats really cool thank you