Is there an emoji for Thank you
Martin J. DΓΌrst
duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Fri Oct 8 04:43:00 CDT 2021
On 2021-10-06 08:35, Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
> On 10/5/2021 3:44 PM, Mark Davis β via Unicode wrote:
>> Already representable, so no emoji character necessary: β€οΈ π
>
> In regular writing, I would distinguish a circumlocution from "a word for it".
> Both can get the meaning across, but they're clearly not the same. A similar
> distinction is applicable to emoji.
Well, β€οΈ π can be written β€οΈπ, and then it would clearly be a a word
(of two characters, so very short compared with the average). And "thank
you" is a two-word phrase to start with.
> However, sometimes we have a "set phrase". If it's the case that a certain
> string of emoji acquires a conventional meaning, then that would be equivalent
> to a set phrase. And presumably mean that having a single word for it becomes
> much less of a concern.
Yes. There are lots of concepts that use two or three words. It depends
on the language, and in many ways is a question of orthography. German
is famous for connecting things where other languages don't connect.
> However, if everyone uses a different ad-hoc circumlocution I would not count
> that as "representable" in the sense that matters for encoding decisions.
>
> I would make that as a principled distinction, irrespective of where you come
> down here for "Thank You!".
>
> Andrew Glass had suggested: π
>
> Clearly, neither his, not your suggestion are as universal as the spoken phrase
> (within its language). So, you could say that a clear and unambiguous
> representation in emoji does not (yet) exist.
And it may never exist. π, to just take an example, can be used for
thank you, but also for to represent "please" or "praying/prayer", and
probably other things. And that's not something Unicode can decide, it's
the users who make things up.
Regards, Martin.
> A./
>
More information about the Unicode
mailing list