On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Peter Constable <peter...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> When it comes to orthography, the notion of what comprise words of a > language is generally pure convention. That’s because there isn’t any > single *_linguistic_ *definition of word that gives the same answer when > phonological vs. morphological or syntactic criteria are applied. There are > book-length works on just this topic, such as this: > > In particular, I see no need to change our recommendation on the character used in contractions for English and many other languages (U+2019). Similarly, we wouldn't recommend use of anything but the colon for marking abbreviations in Swedish, or propose a new MODIFIER LETTER ELLIPSIS for "supercali...docious". (IMO, U+02BC was probably just a mistake; the minor benefit is not worth the confusion.) Mark <https://google.com/+MarkDavis> *— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*
