Jukka K. Korpela, Fri, 21 Dec 2012 21:35:16 +0200: > 2012-12-21 21:05, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > >> My Moscow Russian-Norwegian from 1987 and my Pocket Oxford Russian >> Dictionary from 2003 agree that both list words on Ё and Е under the >> same category – namely, under the letter Е. > > This appears to be the case in any serious dictionary.
In «Tolkovïj slovar’ sovremennogo russkogo jazïka» from 2005 («Dictionary over contempary Russian language»), has located words on Ё in its a separate category, consisting of exactly one word: Ёмкость. That, and the dictionary Leo pointed to, tell me that there is a difference between categorization and collation. > The use of the Cyrillic letter yo (ё, called IO in the Unicode name) > has varied through ages, but it has never been a dominant spelling to > use it. According to “The World’s Writing Systems”, edited by Peter > T. Daniels and William Bright (Oxford University Press, 1995), “The > letter ё is used virtually only in dictionaries or language > textbooks.” It may have become more popular in the Internet, but > still less common than using the letter ye (IE, е) in its stead. The internet has also really boomed since 1995. ;-) >> Fact is, again, that ёлка - "in the wild" - can be written ёлка and >> елка. > > And in most contexts, it is written “елка”. Google Trends has «ёлка» as *pretty* close — I think, but «елка» remains in the leead. <http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=ёлка,елка> > It is of course possible that some people would prefer treating “ё” > as a primarily different letter. But it’s rather illogical to require > that it be treated that way at the start of a word only. I don’t > think collation rules need to accommodate such preferences. Right: To require it would be not be in tune with praxis. -- leif halvard silli
