Talk:Younger Futhark

Minimal pairs

Could someone come up with an example of a good minimal pair to exemplify the point? 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 11:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Application

How does one use these to write Icelandic (or Old Norse)? An explanation of this would be useful, since it isn't obvious—Younger Futhark lacks distinct letters for many of the sounds in ON. --Śiva (talk) 21:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, many of the runes are used for several sounds. Also, there wasn't a standardized spelling, so rune carvers often used ad hoc approximations. As a footnote, I took a summer class in Norse myhology once here in Stockholm, and the teacher told me, basically "You could just imagine how the carvers have simulated sounds with their lips while carving. There are even stones when the same word is spelled differently each time it occurs. Basically, they spelled like hacks." 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 13:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I read a newspaper article the other day where the name of Vladimir Zhirinovsky was spelled three different ways at different places in the text :-) But you are right, an explanation in the article would be useful, and I'll see if I can write something. The example I remember from school is the name Gunvor, which appears on a runestone in Norway, it is written kunuur - the u-rune served for our u, v, and o, and the k-rune served as a g. Makes it a bit more puzzling to read, obviously.--Barend (talk) 14:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

As a footnote, an example like this, where the same rune represents different sounds, would be the only main excuse for using the same rune consecutively, apparently. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 14:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, it seems the writing system generally wasn't used for longer narratives and poetry. Most of the preserved runestones contains mostly formulaized epithets about the person the stone was carved for. They were also painted, and probably produced more to look pretty, than to be great literature. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 14:10, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Typography in article

Anybody know how to make the characters show up? I have my browser (IE7) set to auto-select, and it's identified the page as Unicode (UTF-8), but I'm getting Woodstock talk. Bongomatic (talk) 09:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I think Runic characters aren't installed by default on most standard OS'es and browsers. You need to find and install a runic font by yourself. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:18, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Medieval runes

Medieval runes are mentioned in the article Runic alphabet and it also has an article of its own. While they are descendants of the Younger futhark, do we really need the same text here as well? Same thing goes for the Dalecarlian runes. Tasnu Arakun (talk) 13:14, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Rök Runestone

The ÞiaurikR Strophe on the Rök Runestone appears to use Younger Fuþark, but it doesn't match either the Danish or Swede/Norwegian versions on this page. Is this a third variant? In any case, I would recommend the ÞiaurikR Strophe as a good example, as it only has a few lines but, within it, every Younger Fuþark character is used... a runic pangram, perhaps? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.71.73.162 (talk) 03:52, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

This appears to have been fixed in the main article. However, the rune ᛙ is used for the "m". ÞiaurikR Strophe uses a different form (a vertical line with small cross-bar, similar to that shown in the graphic). This could be due to a deficiency in the Unicode Runic, which doesn't have such a character. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.246.132.26 (talk) 16:10, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Article readability/usefulness

This article uses runic fonts which seriously impair the readability/usefulness of the article as a lot of browsers require that separate fonts are installed. The article also uses fonts in images which display with no problem. I would like to replace the elder/younger futhark comparison with an image which would display correctly without recourse to external fonts. Does anyone have any objections to this? Pryderi (talk) 21:15, 11 August 2014 (UTC)