<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="WordPress/2.6" -->
<rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>Andrei Neculau &#187; diacritics</title>
	<link>http://andreineculau.com/blog</link>
	<description>...trying not to become a man of success, but rather a man of value. (Albert E.)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:15:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	
	<item>
		<title>Romanian &#238; and &#226;</title>
		<description>  I found this interesting answer after asking myself yesterday evening how come we ended up having two letters that are phonetically and functionally identical. Full excerpt from Wikipedia:     The reason for using both of them is historical, denoting the language's Latin origin, although statistically ...</description>
		<link>http://andreineculau.com/blog/2008/05/romanian-and/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Romanian Diacritics</title>
		<description>
Diacritics make a language what it actually is.

Romanian has a handful (and I mean exactly 5) of diacritics. And because we have been put to the test in the 90s and adapted, nowadays we are very much accustomed to see text even without diacritics and we can still read it ...</description>
		<link>http://andreineculau.com/blog/2008/04/diacritics/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 2.050 seconds -->
