# Bring back þ



## tx789 (Sep 14, 2013)

Þe letter þ pronounced thorn (þorn) can replace th. It was used in Old English before the printing press was invented and was no longer used since the letter þ was not used in imported printing presses after þey started using them instead the used y since it looked similar. Þe letter þ is used in Icelandic still. . Þe upper case Þ looks like þis: Þ and þe lower case Þ looks that this: þ. How does th make the sound it does sounding slightly different to f. It's a t þen a h. Þ starts with that sound. Also th appears more in English than z or x. So it won't be unused. What are your þoughts on adding þ back into English's alphabet. Do you hate þ or like þ.


----------



## Mikel (Sep 14, 2013)

I was utterly surprised when I saw þat Owen had not posted þis. Þis has Owen written all over it. Never-þe-less, I þink it would be cool.


----------



## elrog (Sep 14, 2013)

I think its cool, but I really think we need to just completely scrap English and restart with a efficient phonetic language.


----------



## Divineskulls (Sep 14, 2013)

elrog said:


> I think its cool, but I really think we need to just completely scrap English and restart with a efficient phonetic language.



And the Best Off-Topic Post Award goes to...!

But seriously, let's just do that.


----------



## Dene (Sep 14, 2013)

Redundant.


----------



## kunparekh18 (Sep 14, 2013)

Who þe hell cares


----------



## Tim Major (Sep 14, 2013)

I vote we write everything with IPA


----------



## Stefan (Sep 14, 2013)

tx789 said:


> Þe letter þ pronounced thorn (þorn) can replace th.



Like butþurt?


----------



## tx789 (Sep 14, 2013)

Stefan said:


> Like butþurt?



No in that case since th isn't pronounced in one syllable just use a th but the. I guess


----------



## Lchu613 (Sep 14, 2013)

Lol you took Stefan seriously

þiþ would be great for people wiþ liþpþ.


----------



## kcl (Sep 15, 2013)

It's stupid. It got changed for a reason. Why change the system if it isn't broken..


----------



## Tim Major (Sep 15, 2013)

Lchu613 said:


> þiþ would be great for people wiþ liþpþ.


I felt bad for laughing at that. That's brilliant.


----------



## tx789 (Sep 15, 2013)

kclejeune said:


> It's stupid. It got changed for a reason. Why change the system if it isn't broken..



It only changed because it wasn't on the imported printing presses. That lacked the letter


----------



## kcl (Sep 15, 2013)

tx789 said:


> It only changed because it wasn't on the imported printing presses. That lacked the letter



Give me 3 good reasons changing back is a good idea. 3 reasons it ISN'T:

1. General comprehension. I had to actually stop and think about what words were in this thread. That wastes time. 
2. Keyboards. People would have to have a separate button for it, plus T and H would still be there. People would also have to buy new keyboards for it, AND get used to thong with it. 
3. It's easily confusable to people such as me with bad eyesight. In your first sentence, I saw a P and a b. On major news headlines.. Problem? I think yes. 
I'm putting a fourth just for kicks. 
4. Where does it fit in the alphabet? If it's a letter, pronounce it for me. Spell it out phonetically. It's too confusing for modern society to understand. 

I'm done now. 

-Kennan


----------



## SenileGenXer (Sep 15, 2013)

It was going out of style before the printing press. There were huge class and cultural pressures at work against it. The prime conflict that shaped the english language was making it somewhat backwards - it was an Anglo Saxon bit of culture living after the Norman conquest.

It survived the cultural conflict by becoming somewhat latinized. The Y looking variants came before the printing press and were useful in abbreviations. If you wanted to add the letter to your printing press when such a thing was new you would carve yourself a little block of wood with a backwards letter thorn on it. Later you might cast a block a metal with the same thing. It was not hard to add a custom letter or symbol and printers had a full set but I bet the thorn abbreviations with other letters superscripted probably ticked them off. Printers probably chose to discontinue it rather than print those - the instances thorn was most useful to the language.

It was a runic letter in a latinized alphabet. It was a hold out. It was a rune that had morphed in shape to a great extent over it's life. It was easily confused with the other holdout rune Wynn. It was extinct even before there was a strong drive to standardize english spelling and grammar. It was hard for different people from different times to recognize it as the same letter. It is one small part of what makes old, middle, renaissance, and even early modern english unintelligible to modern readers.

I do like the letter thorn. I enjoy knowing about it. I enjoying trying to understand english. It's common roots. I feel there is some great leveling power in the base of the language. I don't think we need to reintroduce the letter thorn. For those of you saying we need a phonetic english thorn was a purely phonetic letter with one unambiguous pronunciation and it was part of a phonetic english alphabet - a runic one.


----------



## kcl (Sep 15, 2013)

See I get that, but in my mind, thorn is a spikey thing on a bush. Making it a letter is dumb. If people who enjoy studying the English language want to use it for some reason, whatever. But it shouldn't be made mainstream.


----------



## JasonK (Sep 15, 2013)

I'd just like to point out that the 'th' digraph represents two distinct sounds. Writing them both with thorn is no improvement. If you really wanted write phonemically, you'd need separate letters for the voiced ('this') and voiceless ('thin') sounds.


----------



## pipkiksass (Sep 15, 2013)

JasonK said:


> I'd just like to point out that the 'th' digraph represents two distinct sounds. Writing them both with thorn is no improvement. If you really wanted write phonemically, you'd need separate letters for the voiced ('this') and voiceless ('thin') sounds.



okso both thorn (ð) (ðis) for voiced dental fricatives and theta (θ) (θin) for non-voiced?

ðis alphabet is going to have a LOT of letters!!!


----------



## SenileGenXer (Sep 15, 2013)

For a time thorn had a little brother eth for the softer voiceless dental fricatives like the th sound in thinking. pipkikass appears to have typed it instead of thorn.

Somewhat relevant to the discussion. 12 letters that didn't make it.


----------



## ben1996123 (Sep 15, 2013)

kclejeune said:


> Give me 3 good reasons changing back is a good idea. 3 reasons it ISN'T:
> 
> 1. General comprehension. I had to actually stop and think about what words were in this thread. That wastes time.
> 2. Keyboards. People would have to have a separate button for it, plus T and H would still be there. People would also have to buy new keyboards for it, AND get used to thong with it.
> ...



1 good reason: you get an extra key for an extra move in simsolves


----------



## kcl (Sep 15, 2013)

ben1996123 said:


> 1 good reason: you get an extra key for an extra move in simsolves



Because 105 keys isn't enough..?


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Sep 15, 2013)

elrog said:


> I think its cool, but I really think we need to just completely scrap English and restart with a efficient phonetic language.



Gaeilge?
Is é an teanga is fearr liom.


----------



## rj (Sep 26, 2013)

elrog said:


> I think its cool, but I really think we need to just completely scrap English and restart with a efficient phonetic language.



þat would be awesome.


----------



## SpeedPube (Sep 26, 2013)

I was in Iceland a few weeks ago and I love the way the locals speak, some great sounding place names too. 

But as much as I love þ, I wouldn't want it in English.


----------



## kcl (Sep 27, 2013)

rj said:


> þat would be awesome.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget its name, "Thong".



Actually it's 'Thorn'


----------



## YddEd (Sep 27, 2013)

rj said:


> Don't forget its name, "Thong".


Another case of 'did not read OP'?


----------



## Ross The Boss (Sep 27, 2013)

no. english is fine the way it is. why **** with it?


----------



## kcl (Sep 27, 2013)

Ross The Boss said:


> no. english is fine the way it is. why **** with it?



My thoughts exactly.


----------



## SpeedPube (Sep 27, 2013)

Ross The Boss said:


> no. english is fine the way it is. why **** with it?



Well, Americans have ****ed with it quite a lot to be honest.


----------



## kcl (Sep 27, 2013)

SpeedPube said:


> Well, Americans have ****ed with it quite a lot to be honest.



YOLO 

Yeah I guess you have a point.


----------



## rj (Oct 3, 2013)

YddEd said:


> Another case of 'did not read OP'?



No, a case of 480*620 screen and bad fonts. 



SpeedPube said:


> Well, Americans have ****ed with it quite a lot to be honest.



No kidding. Read "The mother tongue" by Bill Bryson. It goes into detail on exactly how much we have ****ed english.


----------



## YddEd (Oct 4, 2013)

rj said:


> No, a case of 480*620 screen and bad fonts.


Nah, I'm sure it's a case of "did not read OP".


----------



## JasonK (Oct 4, 2013)

The amount of linguistic ignorance in this thread is depressing.


----------



## pipkiksass (Oct 4, 2013)

rj said:


> Read "The mother tongue" by Bill Bryson. It goes into detail on exactly how much we have ****ed english.



Meh, I COMPLETELY disagree with Bryson - English has been, and always will be, a living language that had evolved through immigration, trade, and social development. We aren't harming the language, we're just witnessing a moment in it's continuing evolution.

Bryson is guilty of linguistic nostalgia: he's idealising a past state of 'pure' English, which never existed.

Back on topic - thorn itself came from continental (Old German) influences on the developing written English language. So immigration and trade brought it in. It disappeared as a result of the arrival of Latinate Indo-European languages. Again through immigration and trade.

Thorn is a cool letter, but the evolution of language is very Darwinian - it had it's time and, sadly, has gone the way of the dodo!


----------



## Noahaha (Oct 4, 2013)

pipkiksass said:


> Meh, I COMPLETELY disagree with Bryson - English has been, and always will be, a living language that had evolved through immigration, trade, and social development. We aren't harming the language, we're just witnessing a moment in it's continuing evolution.
> 
> Bryson is guilty of linguistic nostalgia: he's idealising a past state of 'pure' English, which never existed.



I agree. The nature of a language is to change. When people start saying something enough, it becomes "correct" and part of the language.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Oct 4, 2013)

Let's just all speak Irish.


----------



## UnsolvedCypher (Oct 6, 2013)

elrog said:


> I think its cool, but I really think we need to just completely scrap English and restart with a efficient phonetic language.


Esperanto?


----------



## rj (Oct 6, 2013)

pipkiksass said:


> Meh, I COMPLETELY disagree with Bryson - English has been, and always will be, a living language that had evolved through immigration, trade, and social development. We aren't harming the language, we're just witnessing a moment in it's continuing evolution.
> 
> Bryson is guilty of linguistic nostalgia: he's idealising a past state of 'pure' English, which never existed.
> 
> ...



I disagree with Bryson on some points too. He's not so much nostalgic as practical. I find him unbiased.


----------



## MaikeruKonare (Oct 6, 2013)

It wouldn't bother me. We already know 26 letters what is one more? I learned þe Japanese alphabets and þey each have 42 letters. I bet lazy Americans would be boþered by þis þough.


----------



## elrog (Oct 7, 2013)

MaikeruKonare said:


> It wouldn't bother me. We already know 26 letters what is one more? I learned þe Japanese alphabets and þey each have 42 letters. I bet lazy Americans would be boþered by þis þough.



Stereotype much? Your location says you live in the USA, so do you just mean to say that there are some lazy people in America? Well, there's lazy people in every country.


----------

