Re: Latin chi and stretched x

From: Julian Bradfield <>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 22:15:01 +0100

On 2012-06-08, David Starner <> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Denis Jacquerye <> wrote:
>> Are you sure it's not the opposite? Dorsey had a typewriter that
>> didn't have his turned letters, so he used crossed lines below to
>> indicate what letters should be turned when printed.
> I don't have a source to refer to, but two things make me find my
> memory more likely here. One, this work was done in 1881 and there
> were no field-portable typewriters then; IIRC, typewriters as a whole
> were rare and he probably sent in his work handwritten.

Dorsey's notes for his Omaha-Ponca dictionary are available online at
They are typed; and the turned letters are notated with a
(hand-written) cross below them, as Denis said. There are also some
handwritten annotations using the same convention. I don't know when
this was done, but at least by then he seems to have been using the
same notation in manuscript as in typescript.

The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
Received on Fri Jun 08 2012 - 16:17:11 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Jun 08 2012 - 16:17:12 CDT