"Doug Ewell" wrote: > I suspect it would end when you start talking about combinations like qj > and fþ that are unlikely to appear in natural language text.
You should know better than to make rash statements like this on the Unicode list ! I don't know about qj, but fþ is a not uncommon combination in Old English, e.g. hæfþ (3rd person singular of the verb habban "to have"). Andrew
