Unusual capitalisations

[alice]

I'm looking for languages in which capital letters either appear somewhere else other than the start of a word, or appear in groups of more than one (i.e. normal capitalisation), in otherwise all-lowercase words. Prefixes, as in "un-American", don't count here.

Here's what I know about:

- In Dutch, <ij> is capitalised at the start of a word, as in the river IJssel. (Although someone will no doubt tell me that's because <ij> is actually one letter in Dutch...)
- In Irish, proper names which undergo eclipsis have the new letter prepended to the old, as in i gCorcaigh.
- In Tibetian, the rules for capitalisation are known only by the LORD.

Any others? For balance, of course, we also need unusual socialisations, although I'm not sure what they may be.

[merijn]

Zulu often has capitalizations in the middle of words. It is not so much the noun class prefixes (in most cases where there is a noun class prefix the noun class prefixes are capitalized and not the noun stem) but other prefixes, such as locative prefixes, possessive agreement, prepositions that cliticize to the noun, and most importantly the augment, which consists of a single vowel and is always used except in vocatives, negative polarity items and in some morphological constructions, that make that usually it isn't the first letter of a noun that is capitalized. For a taste of Zulu orthography see http://isizulu.news24.com/ .

[cromulant]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CamelCase# ... _languages

^Probably inaccurate.

[Terra]

Klingon, in its Romanization anyways.

[Timmytiptoe]

In German, Nouns are capitalised.

<ij> is taught in Dutch schools as one letter, and in cursive writing it has its own capial that is not the I and J combined, and it sometimes replaces y (as in this example). Related thing: <sch> was taught as a separate trigraph even though it's just <s> + <ch>.

[Soap]

The Saanich language is almost entirely capitalized.

http://www.languagegeek.com/salishan/sencotentext.html

[finlay]

The Saanich language is almost entirely capitalized.

http://www.languagegeek.com/salishan/sencotentext.html

That looks fucking stupid.

One thing that I find weird about Dutch/Afrikaans capitalisation is that if a sentence starts with a reduced word like 'n or 't, it's the second word that gets capitalised.

I'm really not a fan of camelcase in general, I must admit...

[richard1631978]

Doesn't German capitalise nouns? as does Frisian spoken in Germany.

[Khvaragh]

- In Tibetian, the rules for capitalisation are known only by the LORD.

Capitalization in Tibetan is an academic convention for transliteration. Because the language has a large number of prefixes and infixes (some of which are fossilized), it's sometimes difficult to identify the etymological root. As such, the initial of the root is capitalized, i.e. Gyon-pa "wear" vs. gYon-pa "left side."

[Nortaneous]

edit: almost forgot about the weird LORD thing that gets done in some printings of the Bible

The Saanich language is almost entirely capitalized.

http://www.languagegeek.com/salishan/sencotentext.html

Entirely capitalized except for the third person possessive suffix, which is written <s>. I wonder why.

- In Tibetian, the rules for capitalisation are known only by the LORD.

Capitalization in Tibetan is an academic convention for transliteration. Because the language has a large number of prefixes and infixes (some of which are fossilized), it's sometimes difficult to identify the etymological root. As such, the initial of the root is capitalized, i.e. Gyon-pa "wear" vs. gYon-pa "left side."

Are there any other cases like that? I thought the only ambiguous one is <gy>, and it's transliterated <g.y> if the g- is a prefix. (well, preinitial)

Also, what did the historical prefixes do?

[Khvaragh]

- In Tibetian, the rules for capitalisation are known only by the LORD.

Capitalization in Tibetan is an academic convention for transliteration. Because the language has a large number of prefixes and infixes (some of which are fossilized), it's sometimes difficult to identify the etymological root. As such, the initial of the root is capitalized, i.e. Gyon-pa "wear" vs. gYon-pa "left side."

Are there any other cases like that? I thought the only ambiguous one is <gy>, and it's transliterated <g.y> if the g- is a prefix. (well, preinitial)

Also, what did the historical prefixes do?

You can use the period; there are several root-marking schemes floating around, and not all are consistent. Hodge 2003, the textbook I'm currently using, doesn't mark them at all, and in native orthography, syllables (any only syllables, not even separate words; sentences are though, thankfully) are divided by tsheg or a dot.

I'm not entirely sure about the ambiguity issue, honestly, I haven't studied the language in enough diachronic detail to be sure. DeLancey 2003 gives r, l, s (written above the initial); i.e. rGyal-po "king." I believe that the s might be cognate to an ancient prefix which shows up in Burmese (as a causative) and in Ancient Chinese as well, but I'm not positive. There is also b, d,g, m, and a-tshung (whose origin and articulation is disputed, but might have marked pre-nasalization given reflexes in the Modern language) which are written preceding the initial. Several of these are used, for example, to mark verb tenses (or aspects, which is more likely). For example:
Present: Lta "see"
Past: bLtas "saw"
Future: bLta "will see"
Imperative: Ltos "see!"
Where the root is lta, b- is a prefix for the past (perfective) and future (necessitive), and -s is a suffix for the past and imperative (however, sometimes b is part of the root, i.e. bzheng "erect, compose"). The change from a to o is a result of ablaut (for this root), which DeLancey suggests is due to an ancient imperative suffix -o. However, which one of the prefixes used is dependent on euphonic rules, such as g- before coronals and d- before labials and velars in the present, b- in the past, unless it violates euphonic rules, such as the root already possessing a labial, i.e. bzo "make" but bzos "made" or mthong "see" and mthong "saw."
As for what they did, it's hard to say because it seems there's been a lot of phonological leveling since Proto-Tibetan (i.e. 'bul "offer" vs. phul "offered," suggesting some complicated morpho-phonemic interaction going on), so it's hard to say (AFAIK) which of, for example, the prefixes used for the past is the original (though b- seems likely). b- is also commonly marks transitive verbs.

I'm just starting out with the language, so I'm by no means an expert. I'd take a look at Beyer 1992 "The Classical Tibetan Language," which looks at parallels in other Sino-Tibetan languages.

[Travis B.]

The Saanich language is almost entirely capitalized.

http://www.languagegeek.com/salishan/sencotentext.html

That looks fucking stupid.

Saanich orthography looks horrific even aside from the all-uppercase...

[Jipí]

English capitalization of nationalities.

Also, German capitalizes ß as SS normally. Things might change, though, now that there is a ẞ (U+1E9E LATIN CAPITAL LETTER SHARP S).

[Bristel]

English capitalization of nationalities.

Also, German capitalizes ß as SS normally. Things might change, though, now that there is a ẞ (U+1E9E LATIN CAPITAL LETTER SHARP S).

You German People shouldn't have Complaints.

You capitalize Every Noun and it is an Annoyance.

[Ser]

"Every" isn't a noun tho.

Other strange stuff about English: capitalizing all days, months, languages, musical chords and notes, and most definitely, capitalizing the first person singular pronoun. I remember when I was just starting to learn English, and I thought it looked quite pretentious. As if it weren't enough that in El Salvador Americans have the stereotype of being pretentious already. I think I can condone capitalizing religions though (Hinduism, Christianism, etc.).

I find French capitalization of nationalities strange too, capitalizing nouns but not adjectives. Il est canadien (he's Canadian), c'est une chose canadienne (it's a Canadian thing), BUT elle n'avait vu aucun Canadien (she'd never seen a Canadian).

As for Spanish, it's curious that while accents must be written when writing a complete word in capitals e.g. Canadá > CANADÁ, accents are never to be written in acronyms e.g. primera época > ‹PE›, not *‹PÉ›. Contrast this with Icelandic. In French they're never written on capitals either way. Cardinal points are written with capitals too if they're nouns, but not if they're in compounds: Norte, Sur, hemisferio norte, edificio sur. With the exception of the poles, where both are capitalized: Polo Norte.

[Jipí]

Also, English Capitalization of Any So-Called 'Content Words' in Titles. Not even German does that and it's kind of slightly annoying to see it done by English speakers for foreign titles.

As for German capitalization of any nouns and most nominalizations, I wouldn't be surprised if that'll be gone along with writing compounds as one long word by the end of my lifetime, at least as an informal standard. You often don't do capitalization on the internet in casual contexts, people get it wrong all the time in real life, and separated compounds can be seen everywhere today, not only the internet. It may be noted that this is essentially how German was written in the early modern period, so what goes around comes around

[Hakaku]

French they're never written on capitals either way.

This is changing though. In French Canada at least, the trend and official orthographical recommendation is to include accents in capitalized letters, except in acronyms, though it's increasingly becoming more common. The trend is also spreading to France, but it's currently not as popular.

Something that probably should be mentioned is the capitalization of titles (edit: Guitarplayer beat me to it). In English, we find a few variants:

- The boy that cried wolf
- The Boy that cried Wolf
- The Boy that Cried Wolf
- The Boy That Cried Wolf
- THE BOY THAT CRIED WOLF

Then there's also name capitalization, where John DOE would have the last name prominently cap'ed, or conversely DOE, Jane with a comma.

[Jipí]

We were told that accents on capital letters in French are increasing by our French teacher back in school, too. As for all-caps surnames, I often do that when filling out forms, for better legibility. It's happened that people mistook the <ck> in my name for a <ch> before because my handwriting doesn't make the difference too distinct. And as far as my name goes, ck/ch form a minimal pair.

[Thomas Winwood]

You German People shouldn't have Complaints. You capitalize Every Noun and it is an Annoyance.

This was a relatively standard Practice in English until fairly recently, and I seem to recall reading an Article which stated that it improves reading Comprehension by providing a distinctive visual Hook attached to Nouns (which are frequently the Carriers of lexical Content).

I would not be opposed to its Reintroduction.

[linguoboy]

Other strange stuff about English: capitalizing all days, months, languages, musical chords and notes, and most definitely, capitalizing the first person singular pronoun. I remember when I was just starting to learn English, and I thought it looked quite pretentious.

It's funny to me that a Spanish-speaker should react this way, when capitalising it serves the exact same historical purpose as writing "and" y in Spanish, i.e. preventing an <i> from getting misread as a graphic component of a neighbouring word. We'll change when y'all change.

[alice]

You German People shouldn't have Complaints. You capitalize Every Noun and it is an Annoyance.

This was a relatively standard Practice in English until fairly recently, and I seem to recall reading an Article which stated that it improves reading Comprehension by providing a distinctive visual Hook attached to Nouns (which are frequently the Carriers of lexical Content).

I would not be opposed to its Reintroduction.

It certainly lendeth a certain Style and Dignity to one's Writing, and urgeth the Reader to treat it with more Seriousness. Verily, it beareth Witness to the Decline in Standards by they who do stray from the oh bugger it, I can't be bothered fnishing this Sentence.

[Terra]

Also, English Capitalization of Any So-Called 'Content Words' in Titles. Not even German does that and it's kind of slightly annoying to see it done by English speakers for foreign titles.

I still dislike that Wikipedia only capitalizes the first letter of page titles...

Is there even a strict standard for this? People no-one would capitalize "in" or "of", but what about "between" or "through"? They're still prepositions, but longer.

Seriousness

Seriousneſs*

Then there's also name capitalization, where John DOE would have the last name prominently cap'ed, or conversely DOE, Jane with a comma.

I've only ever seen that on clearly international programs like the Olympics. Aside from forms that have you fill in the bubbles to spell out your name (both first AND last!), it's not used. I remember watching the Olympics with my family, and the names were listed like:
1) Rupert MURDOCH
2) DENG Wendi
3) etc.

They had no idea that "Deng" was supposed to be the family name. (Of course, these are only example names; I don't remember the actual ones, nor are they important.)

THE BOY THAT CRIED WOLF

My copies of the Narnia books do that for the first line of each chapter iirc.

[Ser]

It's funny to me that a Spanish-speaker should react this way, when capitalising it serves the exact same historical purpose as writing "and" y in Spanish, i.e. preventing an <i> from getting misread as a graphic component of a neighbouring word. We'll change when y'all change.

I'm surprised you'd expect a Spanish speaker to think this way. Is that really the reason why ‹y› is used and not ‹i›, I didn't know that at least until now that you're telling me, and it didn't influence my perception of English ‹I›.

Another thing that probably fuelled this perception was that the only pronoun that ever gets capitalized mid-sentence is usted in the abbreviation ‹Vd.›. Something that I only relate to very fancy stuff like invitations to elegant events, verbose formal 19th century writing and the like; generally implying both fanciness and some sort of humbleness of the emisor by putting the receptor on a pedestal with the capital letter. Back then it may have seemed to me that English speakers were putting themselves in a pedestal above others or something.

Then there's also name capitalization, where John DOE would have the last name prominently cap'ed, or conversely DOE, Jane with a comma.

I've only ever seen that on clearly international programs like the Olympics. Aside from forms that have you fill in the bubbles to spell out your name (both first AND last!), it's not used.

I've seen that a lot in the context of library catalogues and referenced works in articles too.

[linguofreak]

You German People shouldn't have Complaints. You capitalize Every Noun and it is an Annoyance.

This was a relatively standard Practice in English until fairly recently,

This can be seen, for Example, in some of the founding Documents of the United States, such as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

[Gulliver]

Also, English Capitalization of Any So-Called 'Content Words' in Titles. Not even German does that and it's kind of slightly annoying to see it done by English speakers for foreign titles.

This has caused me problems. What do you capitalise in titles? It's rarely consistent.

Matilda, Who told lies, and was Burned to Death has one main verb told in lower case, with Burned capitalised. Lies is a noun, but uncapitalised.
Jim, Who ran away from his Nurse, and was eaten by a Lion is more straightforward, but somehow does not look right to me.
The Dreadful Story of Pauline and the Matches has all content words capitalized, which I think looks right.

It has always bothered me (in a pedantic way, not an anti-Christian one) when He and Him are capitalised. I understand capitalising God, as that is a proper noun, but extending it to pronouns is just awful. I fully understand the significance of it, but it is inconsistent; thy in Hallowed be thy name is seldom capitalised despite having the same referent.