Talk:Regional handwriting variation

write numeral 9 like lowercase g

Could you describe this more specifically? There are a wide variety of lowercase "g"s to choose from. --Brion

This seems like a fairly nonuseful page to me... Australians rarely if ever cross their 7, and while there are different conventions for writing letters and numbers, I think it's fairly arbitrary to say 'X' never does this, or 'Y' always does the other. It depends on who taught you...

Slashed zero

Programmers and mathematicians generally put a diagonal slash through a 0 to differentiate it from a capital O, but I wouldn't call that an 'accent'.KJ

I'd say more programmers than mathematicians; in mathematics, a slashed zero is more often used to indicate the empty set (which is different from zero). Growing up, I had the slash-zero habit and got a lecture from my seventh-grade algebra teacher about it. -- Coneslayer

Not all programmers either. The "empty set" symbol is also used by programmers to represent null. That rules out many people versed in programming theory (in addition to those versed in mathematics as stated above). I'd say "some" programmers do it, but "most" is an exaggeration. Also I don't think it's characteristic of programmers, probably just "technophiles" in general, i.e. those who copied the practice from early teletypes.

Side note: physicians apparently use the "empty set" symbol a lot as well (e.g. for "no symptoms" or "all normal"), so I don't see them using the slashed zero either. I'd say it's a rare and somewhat random occurrence and probably more common in some regions and social groups than others (American technophiles the most, I'd wager).

However I do see a lot of programmers adopt the American symbol for the number 1 when writing binary. This has probably more to do with laziness than anything else, though. They often switch back to European numerals when dealing with non-binary numbers. — Ashmodai ^{(talk · contribs)} 03:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"This practice is confusing to speakers of Danish and Norwegian languages containing the letter "Ø", and they prefer to place a dot in the center of zero for this purpose." I'm Norwegian and I can't remember seeing anyone write zero with a dot in. Some people might do it, but the common way to write the number is just 0. Slashed zero doesn't appear in handwriting here (at least I don't know about it), but my calculator use it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.177.64.73 (talk) 14:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Same here in Germany. I've never seen anyone putting a slash through a 0. It's just 0 - everywhere here. --77.20.125.50 (talk) 13:51, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Geocentricism

Er, foreign to where? I thought wikipedia was a worldwide encyclopedia?! DanKeshet

Indeed. Perhaps we should call this "geographically distinctive handwriting forms" or some such. I have the same trouble with the term "foreign language" - e.g. French is foreign to an American but not to a Canadian.

I just read it again, and the more Amerocentric it looks. Why is there no mention of how Americans write? Why is it "Europeans cross their 7s" and not "Americans leave their 7s uncrossed"? -user:Montrealais

Agreed. -- Tarquin 10:15 Jan 6, 2003 (UTC)

I agree with user Montrealais. Wikipedia usually is American-centric. And they think that they're being neutral. Idiots! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.146.12.39 (talk) 16:29, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The whole section should be moved to a section under Grammatology. The study of the history and development of writing systems. Alternatively, it belongs under either Penmanship, Calligraphy or CopyBook Writings. Maybe even as just a section under Graphology, which is where it is linked from. [jb]

I'd vote for the section under Graphology. Objections? Sebastian 19:15 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

Graphology is about the analysis of handwriting.

Calligraphy is about penmanship

Grammatology is about writing systems.

CopyBook Writings are the models that people learn to write from.

Of the four choices, CopyBook Writings might be the most appropriate, as this page Handwriting foreign accent is a practical example of the results of using different copybooks in different places. [jb]

BTW, what is a "copybook"? -- Tarquin

   Examples are Carolingian, Gothic, Humanistic Hand, Foundational Hand,
Neuland Hand, Spencerian Script, Palmer Method, Dubay-Getty Hand.
   http://www.handwriting.org/images/copybook/ contains examples of various
copybooks. Basically, copybook is the model used to teach penmanship.

The Grammatology is not that of Jaques Derrida. [jb]

Really Japanese don't cross 7? I do at least. -- Taku 02:23 Feb 22, 2003 (UTC)

From WP:VFD

WP:VfD/Handwriting_foreign_accent

Most Europeans write numeral 9 like lowercase g (Arial-style)

I don't, and most people I know don't do that (I'm Spanish). I tend to think the French write the numeral 9 like g, although I don't know about other countries. BTW, this article is too Amerocentric: it talks about "foreign accent" and it doesn't say anything about how Americans write. Why not... a list of letters, numbers and symbols and an explanation on who writes each of them in which way? Like:

1: In country X it is common to write it with a hat and underline, in country Y it's writte like an Arial l. Sabbut 08:05, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Maybe some picture/image will be useful.

I know of difference for figure 2: European write a stright horizontal line at bottom, American make it curley (making it like a 'swan'). AnyFile 11:25, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That "European" 2 is actually very common in America, possibly even more common than the "swan" version. Tverbeek 12:56, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

We shouldn't say x IS done here, but indicate that it is the most common practice. I'm American and usually cross my 7's, for example. --Tothebarricades.tk 05:58, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I have a problem with the "European Way", because Europe consists of independent nations which have different schools. So the handwriting actually depends on the country, not the continent.

North America?

Every time I looked at the way I write, I saw North America. I'm from the UK, and it's most likely that the 'North American' style comes straight from here. Maybe it should be changed to make the point that North American is actually 'British-style' Big Moira 13:53, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed Big Moira, handwriting in Britain resembles North American styles more than Continental Western Europe styles in my experience. Also - echoing a point made further up the discussion - I find these descriptions of letters difficult to follow, surely if the text describes a graphical image such as a glyph, it would be much clearer to accompany the text with illustrations? Niki2006 18:57, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about this? "The capital letter Z — In North America and China this letter is usually written with three strokes." I'm from North America (NW United States) and I've never written nor seen anyone write a Z with three strokes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.209.61.152 (talk) 01:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fifty years ago, one could talk about a "national" copybook, because the two dominant copybooks were somewhat similar. Currently there are three or four major players whose copybooks are very dissimilar. Fifty years ago, a copybook from one of the minor players would only be found where that company was located. Currently, the geographical location of the headquarters of the minor player has no bearing upon where their copybook is taught.jonathon 12:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is strange in its assumption that 'North America' is the standard. North American usage derives from the UK (UK styles are largely ignored), but the base form of handwriting is European so the European style should be the starting point. The Yowser (talk) 12:55, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two

What about the absence or presence of a loop in the arabic numeral 2? 134.250.72.191 00:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slant

In the main article, I noticed "Slant is always a function of the taught copybook.[citation needed]".

Do we really need to have a citation for something that obvious? Or to put it differently, can somebody point to an instance of a copybook where slant is not one of the parameters of the copybook?jonathon 19:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what's obvious, because the statement is confusing. Does it mean that the only way someone would slant their writing is if they learned to do it from a copybook? Presumably they would be copying something like an italic hand. Or does it mean, as in your interpretation, that there exists no copybook without some mention of slant? The editor adding the citation request was polite enough not to simply delete the statement for its audacious lack of helpful information. Mephistopheles 11:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I see where the confusion is now. I rewrote that sub-section. I'll check my reference material later, to add the appropriate citations, and correct anything I misremember. jonathon 23:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Graphics

Would adding graphics of the various copybooks be useful? Either to demonstrate slant, or what the different glyphs look like.jonathon 23:48, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think that abundant graphics would be very useful on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.166.145.108 (talk) 09:05, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This whole page is nonsense

Basically the whole page is nonsense. Even in the same country or region (or even in the same school) different people have different writing style. I vote that this page to be changed into "Handwriting Variations" and the regional differences parts all removed or lowered to a subnote to be taken with a (lot of) grain of salt.

And btw, this page's second nonsenseness is because there is no graphic to explain what's being talked about. Half of the texts can be removed and changed into graphic. I (being a layman, not a typographist) can't understand half of the different glyphs being talked about. And I'm sure many people would feel the same as me. The Kid (talk) 20:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And no two people talk alike; does that make dialects "nonsense"? —Tamfang (talk) 19:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unverified Claims / Original Research

Would whoever added the templates for "unverified claims", and "original research" state exactly what they consider to be the unverified claims, and original research? jonathon (talk) 21:37, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated Information

In cleaning up the citation to this entry, I noticed that the only reference is to a 1911 publication (reprinted but not revised or republished as a new edition, per WorldCat) by Lewis Foreman Day. Since Day was known primarily as an art critic associated with the English Arts & Crafts movement, is his book anything more than assumptions and generalizations by an enthusiastic amateur (ala Sabine Baring-Gould)? Hence the "unverified status" on this entry, perhaps? Librmt (talk) 22:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article quality is poor

There are no sources for anything. Many of the examples aren't just regional variations but are variations which could occur within a single country and historical variations. The article is very incomplete, mentioning a few variations in different countries, but doesn't describe all letters for all countries in a systematic way. Count Truthstein (talk) 21:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

zero and O

“

Confusion between the numeral 0 and the letter O can be resolved by using a script letter O (with a loop at the top), and leaving the numeral 0 without embellishments; this was a common practice before use of the slashed zero became the norm.

”

This sentence about an alternative to slashing the zero was changed today to

“

Confusion between the numeral 0 and the letter O can be resolved by using a script letter O (with a loop at the top), and adding a diagonal stroke (slash) the numeral 0 without embellishments.

”

which is ungrammatical and incoherent, so I reverted. The same edit also added these two references:

Fox, D., et al. “Examining Legibility of the Letter ‘e’ and Number ‘0’ Using Classification Tree Analysis.” Usability News 9.2 (2007)Print.
"Reference Data For Radio Engineers, Fifth Edition, Howard W. Sams & Co., Inc., 1970

Should they be attached to the beginning of the paragraph, which discusses slashing? —Tamfang (talk) 23:32, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uppercase I?

Isn't there wide variation in the use of crossbars? 76.18.160.47 (talk) 23:51, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]