MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

Araucaria · 08-27-2015, 04:36 PM

I had a look at this edition of Martineau's autobiography: it is also dated 1877, but evidently for the US market, and published by James R Osgood and Company, of Boston.

The references to Miss Brontë are on page 324 of the book (335 of the pdf).

Here it is a curious fact that the "i" at the end of her name has no dot at all - and certainly not a double dot as AlexBell has found in the Smith, Elder edition.

And now, putting on my pedant's hat, if there are two dots on the "i" in that edition (I couldn't find it), that would be a diaeresis rather than an umlaut (see here), as in the normal spelling of Brontë.

It would hardly be necessary on an "i": it's there on the "e" to show that her name has two syllables.

08-27-2015, 04:36 PM	#4
Araucaria Bibliophile Posts: 166 Karma: 934516 Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Cantal in the French Auvergne Device: Kindle Voyage, Kobo Libra H20, Kindle PW2, Moon Pro on Lenovo tablet	I had a look at this edition of Martineau's autobiography: it is also dated 1877, but evidently for the US market, and published by James R Osgood and Company, of Boston. The references to Miss Brontë are on page 324 of the book (335 of the pdf). Here it is a curious fact that the "i" at the end of her name has no dot at all - and certainly not a double dot as AlexBell has found in the Smith, Elder edition. And now, putting on my pedant's hat, if there are two dots on the "i" in that edition (I couldn't find it), that would be a diaeresis rather than an umlaut (see here), as in the normal spelling of Brontë. It would hardly be necessary on an "i": it's there on the "e" to show that her name has two syllables. Last edited by Araucaria; 08-27-2015 at 04:37 PM. Reason: further thoughts....