Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [WarOf1812] The Letter "J" in the alphabet

Expand Messages
  • spikeyj@crosslink.net
    ... The letter J/j (as something separate from I/i) was introduced in the 16th century. It took a while for the usage to become standardized (just like so many
    Message 1 of 12 , Jun 4, 2001
      On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Scott Jeznach wrote:

      > In the mid to late 18th century, the letter "J" was not used in the English
      > alphabet. The letter "I" was used for both "I" and "J."
      >
      > Was the letter "J" in use by our period (ie: the early 19th Century)?

      The letter J/j (as something separate from I/i) was introduced in the
      16th century. It took a while for the usage to become standardized
      (just like so many other elements of spelling during the early
      centuries of printing), so in the 17th and maybe even conceivably
      early 18th century there would still be some confusion.

      By the 1812 time period the usage was pretty much standardized,
      although I'm sure misleading typefaces (that minimize the difference
      between i and j) could give one the impression that they were still
      interchangeable.

      Spike Y Jones
    • HQ93rd@aol.com
      In a message dated 4/06/01 2:06:38 PM, BritcomHMP@aol.com writes:
      Message 2 of 12 , Jun 4, 2001
        In a message dated 4/06/01 2:06:38 PM, BritcomHMP@... writes:

        << In a message dated 6/4/2001 3:18:33 PM Central Daylight Time,
        scottj@...
        writes:

        << In the mid to late 18th century, the letter "J" was not used in the English
        alphabet. The letter "I" was used for both "I" and "J.">>

        Actually it is in Latin that there is no "J"; in English in anything like its
        modern form "J" is most certainly used

        <<Was the letter "J" in use by our period (ie: the early 19th Century)? >>

        Absolutely. The earliest book in my collection is 1786, this has the usual
        figure that looks like 'f' for a small 'S' but it has both 'i' and 'j'.
        >>

        And don't forget that little ol' King James Bible book thingy...

        (And I've never seen any of my ancestors listed as "Iennings"....)


        B
        93rd SHRoFLHU
        THE Thin Red Line
        www.93rdhighlanders.com
      • dancingbobd@webtv.net
        Hi everyone, I own an butcher knife made in Shefield in the period 1800-1840 by John Wilson Co. It is marked I WILSON. He made knives from the 3rd qtr of the
        Message 3 of 12 , Jun 4, 2001
          Hi everyone,

          I own an butcher knife made in Shefield in the period 1800-1840 by John
          Wilson Co. It is marked I WILSON. He made knives from the 3rd qtr of
          the 18th Cen. well into the 20th Cen. I imagine that he did not want to
          change his "brand" name which was known for high quality. Prior to 1800
          Wilson marked his knives with a touch mark of a pepper corn and a
          diamond. The name was added at the start of the 19th Cen. The
          documentation for this came from the Museum of the Fur Trade Quarterly.

          I also have a 1763 set of Engineer manuals published in Britain which
          uses j as we would today. Things were not as uniform as they are today
          in usage and spelling.

          Regards,

          Bob Dorian
          US Engineers
        • Angela Gottfred
          There is definitely _something_ odd about the way i & j were viewed in the early 19C. My c.1806 edition of Johnson s dictionary considers i and j to be
          Message 4 of 12 , Jun 5, 2001
            There is definitely _something_ odd about the way "i" & "j" were viewed in
            the early 19C. My c.1806 edition of Johnson's dictionary considers 'i' and
            'j' to be the same letter, alphabetizing 'jay' and 'jazel' before 'ibis'.
            'Ibis' to 'idyl' are followed by 'jealous' to 'jezebel'. 'Jezebel' is
            followed by 'if' and so on. I wonder if this is some academic affectation
            that comes from the fact that there is no 'j' in Latin.

            Your humble & obedient servant,
            Angela Gottfred
          • BritcomHMP@aol.com
            In a message dated 6/5/2001 9:19:13 AM Central Daylight Time, agottfre@telusplanet.net writes:
            Message 5 of 12 , Jun 5, 2001
              In a message dated 6/5/2001 9:19:13 AM Central Daylight Time,
              agottfre@... writes:

              << I wonder if this is some academic affectation
              that comes from the fact that there is no 'j' in Latin. >>

              I think you could well be right Angela, that is was considered the same
              letter even though it is written differently and pronounced differently!
              Of course this affectation does not affect the usage in everyday written
              language one jot.

              Cheers

              Tim
            • James Aldrich
              ... Considering earlier efforts to impose Latin grammar on English, I suspect you are not far from the truth of the matter. JSA -- Green Bay Lacrosse-- Play
              Message 6 of 12 , Jun 5, 2001
                Angela Gottfred wrote:

                > I wonder if this is some academic affectation
                > that comes from the fact that there is no 'j' in Latin.

                Considering earlier efforts to impose Latin grammar on English, I suspect you are not far from the truth of the matter.

                JSA

                --
                Green Bay Lacrosse-- Play hard; play often.
              • Craig Williams
                Scott I am doing the film Salem Witch Trials right now, which occurred in 1692 and they definitely used the letter J . one of the poor bastards hung was
                Message 7 of 12 , Jun 12, 2001
                  Scott
                  I am doing the film "Salem Witch Trials" right now, which occurred in 1692
                  and they definitely used the letter "J". one of the poor bastards hung was
                  John Proctor.

                  Craig
                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Scott Jeznach <scottj@...>
                  To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com <WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com>
                  Date: Monday, June 04, 2001 2:55 PM
                  Subject: [WarOf1812] The Letter "J" in the alphabet


                  >Got a weird question for the group.
                  >
                  >In the mid to late 18th century, the letter "J" was not used in the English
                  >alphabet. The letter "I" was used for both "I" and "J."
                  >
                  >Was the letter "J" in use by our period (ie: the early 19th Century)?
                  >
                  >Scott J.
                  >Royal Marines
                  >
                  >
                  >The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of hundreds of
                  square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the fate of THOUSANDS of
                  square miles...
                  >
                  >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  >
                • Roger Marsh
                  Ah - it was Scott Jeznach, then. Kindly elucidate, Scott. Regards, Roger Marsh ... ? ... hundreds of square miles: in North America, hundreds determined
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jun 13, 2001
                    Ah - it was Scott Jeznach, then. Kindly elucidate, Scott.

                    Regards,

                    Roger Marsh

                    > -----Original Message-----
                    > From: Scott Jeznach <scottj@c...>
                    > Subject: [WarOf1812] The Letter "J" in the alphabet
                    >
                    <SNIP>?

                    > >The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of
                    hundreds of square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the
                    fate of THOUSANDS of square miles...
                    > >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.