The Anglo-Saxon Classroom
Jtsummers 2021-08-17 17:08:12 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Interesting article. Unrelated: They had another linked at the bottom which I wanted to read (https://www.historytoday.com/archive/what-did-medieval-schoo..., What Did Medieval Schools Do For Us?). However, instead there's a notice I've hit my limit (one article?!?) but I did enjoy the cartoon that they have there. Now if only they would print the rest in Latin, I could probably fumble through most of it without needing to resort to my college books.
throwaway894345 2021-08-17 17:36:43 +0000 UTC [ - ]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampersand
sdrg822 2021-08-17 17:55:09 +0000 UTC [ - ]
"per se" was used for letters that could also be words "in themselves"
throwaway894345 2021-08-17 18:02:39 +0000 UTC [ - ]
Yes, I didn't mean to imply otherwise. It was only in reading the alphabet.
> but in reading the alphabet, it was confusing to say "and and." To clear up confusion, one could say "and per se and,"
I'm not sure if this is quite right. Per the above wikipedia link:
> Traditionally, when reciting the alphabet in English-speaking schools, any letter that could also be used as a word in itself ("A", "I", and, "O") was repeated with the Latin expression per se ('by itself'), as in "A per se A".
It seems that it wasn't about & being at the end of the alphabet after all, but rather that it was a logogram that could be used as a standalone word? Or maybe "because it was at the end of the alphabet" meant that the "per se" convention was uniquely useful for &, and thus it survived longer than "I per se I" and "O per se O"?
sdrg822 2021-08-17 18:19:41 +0000 UTC [ - ]
tomsto 2021-08-18 16:42:56 +0000 UTC [ - ]
But the practice of reciting ‘and, per se, and’ is only attested in England and the US in the 19th century as far as I’m aware, and that’s where the corruption came from.
throwaway894345 2021-08-18 20:38:55 +0000 UTC [ - ]