----- Message d'origine -----
De: "David Possin" <dave_i18n@yahoo.com>
> I am wondering if the statement on that web page "gh=German ich-laut"
> is applicable. Wouldn't Dutch "gh"-laut make more sense, like in "van
> Gogh"?
Could you explain how the Dutch "gh"-laut is different from the native Dutch
"g"-laut.
Isn't the "gh" in Van Gogh simply an older or a regional form ? (XVIth
century writes, for instance, eyghenschap or Nederlansche Spellijnghe (1550,
first book in Dutch on its spelling from Joos Lambrecht)).
P. Andries
- o - o - o - o
Unicode en français
(texte annoté, noms de tous les caractères Unicode 3.2)
http://hapax.iquebec.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Aug 12 2002 - 11:15:25 EDT