| ▲ | ayhanfuat 17 hours ago |
| Except for the a/e pair, front and back vowels have dotted and dotless versions in Turkish: ı and i, o and ö, u and ü. |
|
| ▲ | o11c 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| In that case they should've used ï for consistency. |
| |
| ▲ | thaumasiotes 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | That would be the opposite of consistency; i is the front vowel and ı is the back one. Note that the vowel /i/ cannot umlaut, because it's already a front vowel. The ï you cite comes from French, where the two dots represent diaeresis rather than umlaut. When umlaut is a feature of your language, combining the notation like that isn't likely to be a good idea. |
|
|
| ▲ | zettabomb 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Makes sense enough, but why not use i and ï to be consistent? |
| |
| ▲ | okanat 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Turkish i/İ sounds pretty similar to most of the European languages. Italian, French and German pronounce it pretty similar. Also removing umlauts from the other two vowels ö and ü to write o and u has the same effect as removing the dot from i. It is just consistent. | | |
| ▲ | zettabomb 16 hours ago | parent [-] | | No, what I mean is, o and u get an umlaut (two dots) to become ö and ü, but i doesn't get an umlaut, it's just a single dot from ı to i. Why not make it i and ï? That would be more consistent, in my opinion. | | |
| |
| ▲ | ayhanfuat 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This was shortly after the Turkish War of Independence. Illiteracy was quite high (estimated at over 85%) and the country was still being rebuilt. My guess is they did their best to represent all the sounds while creating a one to one mapping between sounds and letters but also not deviating too much from familiar forms. There were probably conflicting goals so inconsistencies were bound to happen. |
|