Why are capital and small letters so different?

No, really. How come some of the capital letters (of the Latin alphabet, that is) don’t look like enlarged versions of the corresponding small ones? We all must be so used to the idea, we just don’t notice the fundamental weirdness of that. I can see, for example, small “f” being a close cousin of capital “F”, or small “t” evolving from capital “T”. But how about A, or G, or L?

In the large scheme of things, this arrangement seems to be pretty unique - of all writing systems in the world, AFAIK, only Latin, Greek and Cyrillic feature different, unrelated shapes of the same letter…

I know that the lower case script was originally separate, and developed for centuries on its own as Minuscule script, as a handwritten script with lots of flowing lines…

until it was combined with the Majuscule script, which was practically identical to the old Latin monumental script used in stone inscriptions, during the time of Charlemagne.
Letters such as G have an interesting history anyway. The letter G was originally Gamma, which looks like an upsidedown L (G) but fell out of use during the early Roman period, because the early Romans didn’t use the phoneme Guh very often, and mergerd it with C - but in 312 BC they decided to use a separate letter G again so added a crossbar to the letter C to denote Guh…

I think the cursive minuscule evolved a different character to denote Guh, but can’t remember why.

eburacum45, if nothing else, thanks for the use of the words “minuscule” (in this sense) and “majuscule.” That sounds so much more professional than “big letters” (or “capitals” or “upper case”) and “small letters” (or “lower case”). Plus, now I understand completely that I really knew the words all along, albeit in Spanish where they’re quite similar. :slight_smile:

Actually, the shapes are related. The capital letters were the original forms and the lowercase letters developed as handwritten forms. It’s hard to give examples without extensive use of images, and I’m finding it hard to find a link, but if you look at the letters and try to imagine how the lowercases could’ve evolved from them, you’ll be on roughly the right track.

Marc Drogin’s Medieval Calligraphy is a book that traces the history of calligraphy from the Roman Capital up through the Chancery style.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0486261425/104-9748128-2759129?vi=glance

It also happens to end up explaining how our majescule/miniscule lettering system came to be.

Well, Japanese has two phonetic writing systems – as opposed to the idieographic kanji that most people recognise as the stereotypical Japanese/Chinese writing.

The two phonetic systems (hiragana and katakana) can be though of as analogous to lower and uppercase letters, in as much as they both represent the same group of phonyms. Sometimes the two types of kana for the same phonym look alike, and sometimes they’re very different.

I’m not sure of the history involved with the development of the different kana – I just wanted to point out that western languages aren’t the only ones where, when you think you’ve managed to learn the alphabet, someone comes along and say “Hah! Now you get to learn the whole thing all over again with different letters!”.

Adding to eburacum45

Think of lower-case letters as being the missing link between capitals and shorthand.

Back in the early Christian period (way WAY before the days of printing) every letter was drawn by hand. People were searching for ways to write faster. The church developed a system of writing referred to as “Unical.” These are basically capital letters, except the letterforms are freely-drawn rounded forms, the curved nature of the letters reduced the number of strokes required to make most letters as well as reduced the number of angular joints, which had a tendency to clog up with ink.

The Unical was followed by the “Half-unical.” This new development had acenders and decenders, which helped to differentiate the shape of the letters and allows for faster reading. The half-unical gave way to “Caroline Miniscules” around the ninth century.

These were considered a completely different type of letterform than the classic capitals and using upper and lower case type together wouldn’t come into practice until the time of Charlemagne. If that seems amazing, consider that they had only gotten the bright idea of using spaces between words instead of runningthemalltogether a few hundred years prior to that.

[Content above paraphrased or downright copied from: History of Graphic Design by Phillip Meggs]
Let’s see if I can articulate how the letters you mentioned got constructed:

A: There are two types of lower-case “a”. One of them looks like an upside down lower-case “e.” That’s the one we’re talking about. Start by drawing the angled right stroke of the capital A. Now instead of doing a second angle for the left side and and additional line for the crossbar, draw both strokes at once by starting near the top - pull down to the left, once you near the baseline, curve back up and to the right to approximate an angled cross-bar. Bastardize that over the course of a few centuries and there you have it.

G: You know how you have to do two strokes to make a “G?” You do the “C” part first, then you go back to add that little, rotated “L” on the right side? Do that all in one stroke. Curve the end of your “C” up and to the left a little, and then to distinguish it from a “curvy C” double back to the right and down to pronounce that vertical line on the right. After a while that last vertical stroke down became longer (past the baseline) and curved to left to distinguish it from the “q” which eventually came along.

L: Well, just draw one less stroke. Looks a lot like a capital “i” doesn’t it. Actually some (relatively) newer sans-serif designs like DIN Schriften acknowlege this and are reintroducing a little curved hook to the bottom to distinguish it from the capital “i”.

How much of a typography geek am I?

      • Well DUUUHHHHH!!! Just use smallcaps, sillypants!
        ~

Handwritten Chinese characters look quite different from printed or canonical (brush written) characters. The same characters printed and handwritten