Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:ẘ. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:ẘ, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:ẘ in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:ẘ you have here. The definition of the word Talk:ẘ will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:ẘ, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
No language I know does. Neither does Unicode give any hint. -- Liliana•16:24, 14 April 2012 (UTC) (addendum: this letter would very likely fail verification if it were put up on RFV.)Reply
RFV
Latest comment: 12 years ago16 comments7 people in discussion
Being in Unicode is not a free pass, and this letter has to meet RFV like everything else. Since nothing I know uses it, this is very unlikely. -- Liliana•20:05, 14 April 2012 (UTC)Reply
I asked on the Unicode list, and someone who was around in 1991 looked at the paper documents. Classic "not everything is on the Internet yet" case.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:40, 17 April 2012 (UTC)Reply
That's not true; ḃ and a number of other dotted characters in that range are used for the old orthography of Irish; they all map to bh, etc. in the new orthography. Another example is ẁ, used in mẁg. Those are listed in the PDF; a quick search turns up that ḻ, which is labeled as being for Indic transliteration, is being used in Seri and Lillooet and probably others (underlines being a very easy "diacritic" to add on typewriters when these orthographies were being created). All it does say is that the whole range was not in character sets that Unicode originally saw a need to map to one-to-one. A lot of them may be for transliteration, but I don't think we can conclude that for the unlabeled ones without research, and even those encoded for transliteration may see use in orthographies in natural use.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)Reply
