Just wondered whether the elongated "s" (like an "f") used in old English text had any rule(s) for its use in replacing ordinary "s", or was it inserted at whim?
Top answer
[/nq] Was it similar to the rule in classical Greek for the use of its two s-forms? Adrian
— Usenet
[/nq] Was it similar to the rule in classical Greek for the use of its two s-forms?
Adrian
Free · every Monday
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
[nq:1]Just wondered whether the elongated "s" (like an "f") used in old English text had any rule(s) for its use in replacing ordinary "s", or was it inserted at whim?[/nq] Was it similar to the rule in classical Greek for the use of its two s-forms? Adrian
[nq:1]Just wondered whether the elongated "s" (like an "f") used in old English text had any rule(s) for its use in replacing ordinary "s", or was it inserted at whim?[/nq] Cecil Adams deals with the matter in a Straight Dope column. There was a rule, although the "long 's'" was often used more often than the rule would call for. See
[nq:2]Just wondered whether the elongated "s" (like an "f") used ... in replacing ordinary "s", or was it inserted at whim?[/nq] [nq:1]Cecil Adams deals with the matter in a Straight Dope column. There was a rule, although the "long 's'" was ... extended from the left to the middle bar, rather than crossing the bar entirely, as is the case with "f."[/nq] Adams also fails to point out that
[nq:1]English[/nq] You're right, but it's more complicated than that. The thing to learn was that the eszett wasn't used between two short vowels (in a non-compound). So "essbar" (edible) used the eszett but "essen" (to eat) didn't. Some people thought the recent spelling reform would scrap the eszett, but instead the rule is now that it's only used after a long vowel. So "essbar" is just doub