An f without the crossbar, ſ , sometimes more fully shaped at the bottom, like the integral symbol.
As best I can tell… linguists have not actually been able to figure out totally consistent rules for its usage, beyond ‘it replaces s, sometimes’.
It seems to pretty much be purely stylistic flair, everyone who did use it seems to have slightly different rules for how and in what circumstances they did. It tends to follow certain broader rules, but counterexamples can be found for most of them.
… I wonder if we could merge old/middle english characters and l33t sp33k.
Tho Đ/đ, Ŧ/ŧ are also cool, more historically accurate(thorn and eth were never as clean cut as we like to think) and fit the vibe of the english alphabet better.
I can þink of anoðer couple candidates.
There’s also thiſ.
The ‘long s’.
An f without the crossbar, ſ , sometimes more fully shaped at the bottom, like the integral symbol.
As best I can tell… linguists have not actually been able to figure out totally consistent rules for its usage, beyond ‘it replaces s, sometimes’.
It seems to pretty much be purely stylistic flair, everyone who did use it seems to have slightly different rules for how and in what circumstances they did. It tends to follow certain broader rules, but counterexamples can be found for most of them.
… I wonder if we could merge old/middle english characters and l33t sp33k.
ð4t aſſ B b0unc1n, æ’r3 d4y, æ’r3 9t
Tho Đ/đ, Ŧ/ŧ are also cool, more historically accurate(thorn and eth were never as clean cut as we like to think) and fit the vibe of the english alphabet better.