Can Anyone Explain Why The Letters Were Double Printed With Different Fonts

I would suggest reading Martin Silvertant's answer to Why is the shape of the letter “a” in computer fonts different from its handwritten version? who answers this very question very thoroughly.The history of typography is very interesting.Here is a visual graphic showing the evolution of the letter g.Note that the written style of the letter g did exist and looked something like the g on the top, where the print/computer one is based on the bottom.These kinds of mysteries abound in English, and indeed, likely in all languages. Quirks, habits, and inconsistencies shape the way we write and speak.Fun fact, google recently changed from its previous g to the written style g.They also changed the colors and simplified all of the letters.Modern letter forms are the product of a combination of tradition, technical considerations, readability considerations, and interactions between handwriting and printed texts as well as between several flavors of the latin alphabet (roman type, blackletter and gaelic). We can’t make more than educated guesses as to why certain variants survived while others didn’t. After all, there isn’t any committee that decides things like this, language evolves naturally, usually for efficiency. For example conjunctions are convenient and faster than saying “can not” “will not” and “do not” all the time. Can’t, won’t, and don’t is simply easier, but no one formally decided this.It can be assumed the reason two variants of a and g mainly survived was because the two-storey variants are not feasible in handwriting, while they have advantages in print. The double-storey a is easier to distinguish from the letter o compared to this one: a. The double-storey g is narrower and also easier to distinguish due to its unique shape. So essentially the double-story versions help us not mix them up with other letters so reading is faster and with no confusion.

Both the handwritten single-story form and the two-story form used in many fonts (but by no means all) are ancient, arguably archaic. Both are over a thousand years old! So the idea that one is archaic and the other is not cannot be taken seriously. Similarly, both are hand-written forms; the two-story a was not invented for typefaces.For instance, look at examples of uncial script from the 4th to 8th century. One can find many examples of both forms of the lowercase a. The Book of Kells uses a single-storey a, but the Codex Bezae uses a double-story one. A search on “uncial a” shows both versions, but primarily the double-story one.The same thing is true with blackletter calligraphy: both forms of a co-existed in this writing style, well before the existence of the printing press. The Gutenberg Bible uses a two-story a, as do most incunabula (books printed in the 15th century). But many examples of blackletter typefaces with single-story a can also be found.In modern typefaces, almost all serif fonts use the two-story form, and a majority of sans serif type typefaces as well (Futura is the most common single-story a typeface).The reason they are rarely seen in the most common computer fonts is at least as much legibility as history: it is easier to distinguish the more complex shapes of the two-story a from other letters.Also, I think your question relies on a false assumption. “Apparently, the computer version is based on an archaic version of the letter. So why don’t we change it to the handwritten form we are more used to?”I would argue that people read vastly more text on screen or in print than they read hand-written text, and that they write much less than they read. So, in fact, the two-story a is the one “we are more used to.” Not the single-story a.

The font which is highly recommended for legal documents are Serif Fonts. Serif Fonts are those in which a small line is attached to the end of a stroke in a letter or symbol. There are ample of examples for such font’s for instance Arial, Calibri etc. By this the document will look professional and easily readable.The size of the font also matters and usually it is 12. The font should not be mixed as the document will look busy or even worse. For legal documents the page number, writing style, line spacing and alignment also plays a vital role. However in a Legal processing outsourcing it is not always possible to make all our documents accessible to all clients and we should ask them to provide the information in an alternative format upon request by this firm can acquire transparency in business.

Firstly because English isn’t the model on which these other languages’ orthographies are based. That is Latin, if you go back far enough, and in Classical Latin there was actually no letter W. It was one of the newer characters added to the Latin script later on in order to use it to write other languages. In fact, Classical Latin used one single letter, V, for U, V, W, which could be pronounced /w/ as a consonant, or /u/ as a vowel.Charles L McClenon has given a decent phonological argument for German, so I’m going to address Polish, which also uses the letter W for the sound /v/, and doesn’t use the letter V at all except in unassimilated foreign words. This is largely related to the old Blackletter fonts that used to be used to print German and West Slavic languages. In that font the letters U and V looked too similar, so it was far more economical to use W instead of V. Czech also used to write the sound /v/ as W until the 19th century, when advances in printing technology prompted an orthography reform.Until fairly recently, the font used to print languages was seen as just as integral to the written language as the alphabet. Look at this extract from a Czech grammar book written in Latin in 1603:(Source: Koupil, Ondřej. Grammatyka Cžeska: Mluvnice češtiny v 16. až 19. století. Praha – Akropolis 2015, p 49.)The Latin text is in a Roman serif font and the Czech text is in Blackletter. These conventions often influenced decisions about how to represent certain sounds in writing.The only other language I can think of where W is pronounced differently to in English is Welsh, where it can be a vowel, pronounced similar to the “u” in “put”. Welsh has even more vowel contrasts than English does, IIRC, so choosing another letter to represent certain vowel tones was a very wise move indeed.

The second “a”, the typed one, is a much older version of “a” (it’s still a valid way to write it, and many people do write it that way). The “a” we (normally) write today is much more like the cursive “a”, loop, then straight line down. It’s quick, simple, and you don’t have to check to make sure it’s legible. Think of it as something that started as shorthand and ended up being something everyone uses (like CDs giving over to ITunes). Whereas the “a” you type is much more complex, like how the “g” is probably different from what you read printed in everyday life.To be blunt, the typed “a” is much prettier, like the aforementioned “g” or the way the “2” doesn’t have a loop, or how the “7” doesn’t have that little line that some people add in real life, the “9” doesn’t have a straight line, or a hundred other examples. It also looks more officious, and sort of screams “old timey” and “authoratative”.To sum it up, the regular written “a” is more casual. The typed “a” is more old-fashioned and fancy.