Why Is This? (Need Handwriting Experts)

[Petergriffin]

In the picture below, there are two methods of writing the letter "t". Both are used throughout the passage. Why is this? Is there a rule when using one "t" over the other? I prefer the "t" with no cross, so can I use that exclusively in my writing if it is legible?

 

[pmhudepo]

Have you considered asking caliken, since I believe he wrote this sample?

 

Edward C. Mills uses both styles as well: page 31 and page 43

 

A.N. Palmer equally so: page 29

 

In the Palmer book, a reason for different versions of the letter 'r' is given on page 44. I suspect it's the same for 't': uncrossed is faster, easier in the flow of a word.

Edited April 18, 2013 by pmhudepo

[caliken]

The alternative hooked 't' is generally reserved for the end of a word but there are exceptions.

There are many historic examples of both types of 't' being used in the same text, and some where the hooked version is used elsewhere in a word, and not just at the end. It would appear to be largely at the taste and discretion of the writer.

 

Ken

[rwilsonedn]

I'm not by any stretch a calligrapher, but I suspect the hooked t preserves the monoline nature of business hand, but sometimes it is difficult to merge the hook into the join for the next letter, so the crossed t is the only attractive option. I suspect that, as caliken suggests, it is a matter of pretty-much unconscious preference, as the skilled penman would be absorbed in the rhythm of the monoline and would just automatically draw whichever version flowed most smoothly into the line.

ron

[MusinkMan]

I'm not a calligrapher either, but only a neophyte wannabe. However, I have been studying a lot on this. The information I have learned (from reading) agrees with Caliken's take. But this is not reserved for only business hand. It is a routine fixture in Spencerian and Ornamental Spencerian as well as business hand. Likely it is used in other hands as well, but my studying and knowlege is quite limited at this point.

[thang1thang2]

I'm not a calligrapher either, but only a neophyte wannabe. However, I have been studying a lot on this. The information I have learned (from reading) agrees with Caliken's take. But this is not reserved for only business hand. It is a routine fixture in Spencerian and Ornamental Spencerian as well as business hand. Likely it is used in other hands as well, but my studying and knowlege is quite limited at this point.

 

This particular type of T is limited to Spencerian/Ornamental/Business script as they're all derivatives of the same root hand (Spencerian). However, many scripts (almost all, actually) have alternative lettering styles. Take copperplate, for example, with the cursive type of 'r' and the more manuscript style of 'r'. Almost all of these can be used interchangeably as they were characteristics of the script, not the language. The long 's' of the english language had specific rules, because it was an actual character of the alphabet, and thus had dictations for uniformity. However, none of the alternative characters of other scripts have these sorts of rules. Suggestions, yes, guidlines perhaps; but none of them were required since it wasn't breaking the actual language to break the "guidelines" of which letter form to use where.

[Petergriffin]

Thank you everyone for your very helpful answers!

[GClef]

http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/photobucket-11499-1366323398619_zpsb3081205.jpg

[Elizabeth in NJ]

What is your goal? Is it to do a perfect reproduction of Palmer just to do it or is it to use Palmer in everyday life?

 

If it's the latter, you should use the crossed t everywhere.

 

The non-crossed t is a lot less legible to the modern eye. It may have been perfectly legible to the average person in 1913, but in 2013, the average person would not see that thing and think "t." IMHO, when it comes to everyday writing, legibility trumps style. Fortunately, one does not preclude the other.

 

GClef--Your rear looks fabulous!

[ehemem]

http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/photobucket-11499-1366323398619_zpsb3081205.jpg

 

I think you need 2 mirrors for that...

[GClef]

I think you need 2 mirrors for that...

 

http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/photobucket-16127-1366344433617_zps7976d954.jpg

[Oggie]

My 80-year-old mother is the only person I've known who uses the uncrossed 't' at the ends of words. Unless she learned it from one of her parents, she would have learned it in her rural public school around 1940. I seem to remember she told me it done was to save time.

[qwertzu]

I find this "r" and "t" to be faster as well. I have modified the "t" a little so as to sort-of cross it as part of the curve of the stroke to help with the legibility for modern eyes, still much faster than going back and crossing them. The "r" doesn't seem to affect legibility too much, most folks seem to be able to figure out the words even if they can't identify the "r".

[Elizabeth in NJ]

I have modified the "t" a little so as to sort-of cross it as part of the curve of the stroke to help with the legibility for modern eyes, still much faster than going back and crossing them.

That sounds interesting. Would you mind posting a scan?

[thang1thang2]

That sounds interesting. Would you mind posting a scan?

 

From the description, it sounds like, as the normal one is sort of an up down up and out. He merely changed the third stroke to be more of a circular path. Thus, it would start from the bottom of the 't', go to the left of the 't' (and above the other letter behind it) and then cross over the 't' as close to the same angle as the original ending 't' as possible. In essence, looking like a "sloppy t" to many, but a hybrid 't' to those who know of the alternative 't' style.

 

Did I get that right?

Edited April 22, 2013 by thang1thang2

[ehemem]

I think you need 2 mirrors for that...

 

http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/photobucket-16127-1366344433617_zps7976d954.jpg

 

Philosophically, this is a fundament-al question...

[StyloBug33]

I have modified the "t" a little so as to sort-of cross it as part of the curve of the stroke to help with the legibility for modern eyes, still much faster than going back and crossing them.

That sounds interesting. Would you mind posting a scan?

 

I would appreciate a scan also.

 

I am also a little confused regarding the topic at hand. I thought one of the hallmarks of legible handwriting was that all letters were made in the same way. I am certain I have seen this advice in many posts where someone asks for advice on improving their handwriting. I have also driven myself a little crazy figuring out what specific letter shapes I was to use in my handwriting.

[pmhudepo]

I am also a little confused regarding the topic at hand. I thought one of the hallmarks of legible handwriting was that all letters were made in the same way. I am certain I have seen this advice in many posts where someone asks for advice on improving their handwriting. I have also driven myself a little crazy figuring out what specific letter shapes I was to use in my handwriting.

 

I think that consistency, in shape, slant and size, is indeed important for legibilty. But perhaps in the case of Palmer or Business Writing, a requirement was added: speed! Its main use at the time was quick writing in offices: fast, unadorned script. Having a "short-cut" version of the letter "t" may have been an acceptable compromise?

[pmhudepo]

I just realised that my answer doesn't make much sense. Why not simply always use the fastest version of a letter, if speed is a requirement of a certain script? That way, you'd have consistency and speed.