Sanakirja.org

Esimerkit

• It must be remembered that we are dealing with uncials. ΒΟΟ could not very well become ΒΟΥ. But in the pre-Euclidean alphabet the impure diphthong resulting from the contraction of two omicra, as distinguished from the pure diphthong with a real u-element, was written Ο.
• Perhaps the announcers think that two omicra make one omega, for, of course, unlike the other words I have quoted, “polio” does have two omicra in it.
• Yet are we wise to transcribe ypsilon as h in all cases? The study of the coins has shown long ago that ypsilon was used for h, and it is true that it is so used in the inscription. Nevertheless, in cases where there would otherwise be a heaping of omicra, it may perhaps serve as ṷ. For example, λρονο 4, 14/5, surely = lruṷᵒ from Old Ir. druwa-,³ which otherwise might have been spelt λροοο…
• ³ Not recognized by M. Maricq.
• The fact that in M all omicra are round, while in A most of them are square, should neither blind us to the basic affinity of hand of the two versions, nor raise false hopes that individual hands may be identifiable either. For the few round omicra of A are so distributed (see Göbl’s plate X) that it would be absurd to attribute every change of o-shape to a change of stone-cutter.
• The two omicra are separated by a vertical line of unknown significance.