Comment by rob74

Comment by rob74 8 days ago

6 replies

View on Hacker News

Wait what? He writes "For example, the first ten letters of the Hungarian alphabet are¹", but the note is "I got this information from the Unicode Standard, Version 15.0, Chapter 7: “Europe I”, Section 7.1: “Latin”, subsection “Latin Extended-B: U+0180-U+024F”, sub-subsection “Croatian Digraphs Matching Serbian Cyrillic Letters.”

Actually it kinda makes sense to have two Latin letters form a digraph if they are used to represent a single Cyrillic letter, while it makes less sense for Hungarian, which (AFAIK) has always been written with Latin letters? I mean, of course you could do it, but then I want an extra Unicode code point for the German "sch" too!

If you look at the whole Hungarian alphabet (https://learnhungarianfromhome.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/0...), you get a total of 8 digraphs and 1 trigraph (plus 9 letters with diacritics), but "Lj" and "Nj" are not among them...

anamexis 8 days ago

From the article:

> These digraphs owe their existence in Unicode not to Hungarian but to Serbo-Croatian. Serbo-Croatian is written in both Latin script (Croatian) and Cyrillic script (Serbian), and these digraphs permit one-to-one transliteration between them.¹

Reply View 3 replies
  • rob74 8 days ago

    Yeah, but then why bring up Hungarian (which has very little in common with Serbo-Croatian, although spoken in a neighboring country) in the first place?

    Reply View 2 replies
    • anamexis 8 days ago

      Because Hungarian is an example of having 3 cases, but only some of the Hungarian digraphs have these 3 cases encoded in Unicode.

      Reply View 1 reply
      • rob74 8 days ago

        Yes, buuuut Serbo-Croatian obviously has those 3 cases too, so he could have made the post much clearer by leaving out Hungarian and only focusing on Serbo-Croatian (or mentioning Hungarian only as an aside). I mean, if three of these four digraphs don't even exist in Hungarian, and "dz" is the only encoded Hungarian digraph, it's pretty obvious that the fact that it was encoded is only a coincidence?

        Reply View 0 replies