The progression of two words, hyphen and then compound words in English is documented well in The English Language (1985) Burchfield and other books.
Compound words are common in German and are old in Irish, but infrequently created in Irish compared to English.
Several books I have give examples of English words that have a hyphen that are unlikely to lose it due to repeated identical vowels.
It's a natural inevitable process in English.
Quote:
Case after case has been brought up, explaining why emphasis and italics are different.
Italics DOES NOT EXIST in many languages.
Emphasis IS DONE COMPLETELY DIFFERENTLY in many other languages
|
All true and in English Emphasis more often done using bold, not italics.
I've never denied any of those points. Thus there is some validity for <strong> on some words rather than <b>.
But it's bogus to claim the features of <em> and <strong> were added for accessibility (the history of the specs prove it) and in practice make no difference even if used properly (text read by humans proves it). If it's a real thing at all it's marginal and if it mattered the <strong> and <em> are overwhelmingly abused as simply an alternate to <i> and <b>. The scheme after 14 years hasn't worked and it doesn't matter.
In English Emphasis and marking Emphatic dialogue may only matter in scripts for Plays, Radio Drama, TV & Movies that would have additional directions anyway. Neither fiction, journalism nor textbooks/reports are like Screenplays. A narration by a human of fiction isn't an Audio Drama either.
We use accessibility features in LO Writer. But we only use features that make sense in the real world.