Activity for Moshi
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #277352 |
@ArtOfCode I'm pretty sure you said you didn't want to use them... (I asked, you said there's no need, that's what I'm taking as a rejection) (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277352 |
@msh210
So we basically agree then. There should be more fonts in the font stack for language coverage. lang attributes are my preferred choice as well, but @ArtOfCode said that they didn't want to use them (don't ask me why). (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277352 |
@msh210 besides... I do have Noto. But because Noto isn't listed in the font stack for the site, my browser doesn't decide to use it. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277352 |
@msh210 "everyone else can suffer" That's... pretty callous, no matter how I see it (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277298 |
The spelling never changed. People pronounced it as pronunciation, so people spelled it that way. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277298 |
@DecapitatedSoul normally, you *want* the spelling of words to match their pronunciation. (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277352 |
@Sigma Windows 10 / Edge, but it really comes up everywhere since it's not actually a bug (more) |
— | over 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277304 |
I don't think it should be limited to being for language students (which I take to mean 'people learning a language'). I take the scope of the Resources section to be the same as the scope of the site: pretty much anything about languages goes. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277281 |
@Sigma I don't think there really is a consensus. On the one extreme, we could have one resource post for every language, and have headings for each topic. On the other extreme, it could be like a "community blog" where people can post any helpful articles they want and it would be organized by tags ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277108 |
Whether it is meant to imply "in formal English", "in standard English", or "at all" is a bit ambiguous though. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277108 |
It is also interesting to note that Cambridge Dictionary contradicts itself: from here: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/contractions
"We don’t use more than one contraction" (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277108 |
@Monica Cambridge Dictionary lists the `'d've` contraction as it's own entry: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/d-ve?q=%27d%27ve
As far as I can tell, those are the only double contraction entries in those respective online dictionaries (at least, I'm not going through the entire ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277108 |
@Monica Saw this pop up to the top again. What do you consider "formally recognizing" as normative? For example, "I'd've" is actually an entry in the Collins Dictionary: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/idve (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277108 |
Wiktionary has a page for "double contractions" (contracting twice)
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:English_double_contractions
so obviously, it is considered normal (or at least common). It's even more informal than single contractions though, which makes them quite rare outside of speech.... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277095 |
Roboto Mono doesn't contain those glyphs anyway. Your computer is using an alternate font, which means that it is a font issue, but not with Roboto Mono.
Try using inspect element to figure out what font is actually loading.
EDIT:
Actually, try editing your answer. When I opened up your answer t... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
- ← Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next →