diacritical marks are not so much
   refining accents,
   as invigorating syllables -
and from what i've heard -
      the poles are mesmerising in
their clear-cutting of words -
thanks to a few stress marks in
the diacritical dimension;
it's almost funny how the english,
on the other hand,
sometimes veer into the:
i don't know how to pronounce that,
word... it's almost too common
to be comical, sorry, i'm not being
sarcastic, just **** pedantic.

take for example the japanese word
sūdoku -
       ah... you can write that another way...
i already transcended the slavic
orthodoxy by invoking an
orthographic change to the grapheme
sz via the already existing
                                                  š -
as i might also revise the grapheme
cz with a caron c - č -
    while at the same time disregarding
the caron z (ž) -
why? just tell me, is it a shaker or
a choker? (sh = sz, germanic through
to slavic, ch = cz, 180°).
   so the caron over the zee, zed, zippy,
isn't helpful, not in the least,
   i have to curate orthography for a reason,
and as i said before:
  you can only speak of orthography
if you apply diacritical marks -
an i or a j does not count in english...
even though i is actually a headless horseman
in greek: ι - ιoτα...
you hear that?
               ancient greece morphed into
modern day russia,
while ancient rome morphed into
america: same ****, different cover,
  a much larger cover, but still the same
****.
besides the point...

while some philosophers mind the nitty-gritty
of dialectics,
i prefer the solitude of toying with
diacritics,
  where others concern themselves
with metaphysics,
i concern myself with orthography -
which means:
                       what is to be made of
the para- affix in what makes up
  the trinity of benzene ring attachment -
paranormal, para-"physics"?
           we have to options though...
it's either the orthodoxy of s
or it's the revision, via what probably
sound more japanese:
   súdokú! that crisp smacker of a leather
boot done after marching in formation
and standing to attention,
typical in samurai films:
  a waterfall syllables: su-do-ku!
said really quickly.
   i'd settle for súdokū -
and why would i disturb the original
orthographic aesthetic?
      macron over a letter implies: prolonged...
soo do'h koo...
             you unravel the last of diacritical
application in english and you get
the ugly english, the butters english of east
london / innit bruv?!
                su!-d'oh!-koo -
but we don't have to change orthodoxy,
orthodox application of my revision might
precipitate in 50 to a 100 years,
   at the moment we're merely entertaining
the notion that, it might happen.
i already transcended orthographic
orthodoxy with the s / c + z graphemes using
the caron... so, why not?

  at puzzle no. 9434 i started wondering,
what if europeans reinvented the original japanese,
and instead of using 1 - 9 in the digit
puzzle, instead used a - i?
        ha, how convenient, a.i.

A = 1, B = 2, C = 3, D = 4, E = 5, F = 6, G = 7, H = 8, I = 9

e.g.

F  H  C  A  I  E  G  D  B
G  A  E  D  B F  H  C  I
B  D  I   H  C G  A  E  F
I                                    E
E              ­                     A
A                                  H
D                         ­         C                            
C                         ­          G
H  F  G  B  E  C   I   A D

just to pretend the ancient romans invented
the japanese puzzle, for fun; why not?

but it wouldn't catch on, i know for sure,
since what i discovered at puzzle no.
9434 are the súdokū shíkakū -
blind spots!
           these japanese puzzles are not
that difficult,
   well, what they certainly are almost akin
to optical illusions -
     there's no real logic involved,
there's no real: 1 + 1 x 20 - 6.5 x 3 etc. -
the thinking behind the puzzle is
purely optical, hence the emergence of
súdokū shíkakū -

  which would be probably more
apparent if the digits were replaced by
letters -
                mind you: the empty squares
resemble 0, and i wonder, is the digit
0 interfering with me looking for
the other digits, just like replacing
1 - 9 with A - I be hindered by
phonetic digits J - Z?
  
   after all, the orientals have not concept
of phonetic digits - since they
do not have an alphabet...
           some people them ideograms,
i just call them syllables...

                    and for a language as the oriental
languages: so intricately written,
   sorry, but the end result in actual talk is
anything but spectacular;

which can only account for
  the only digits they do know -
      unlike the europeans with their digit
structure in both letter and number -
almost muddled - or actually muddled
   via dyslexia / dyscalculia -
and that being said:
   i had a friend with dyslexia...
  ended up working in a bank...
         as is the case with most dyslexics...
really good at numbers,
like the orientals...
                                        and like the example
of me: i'm not so good with numbers,
unless they are puzzling -
                 but that does not mean
that i'm an erratic spender either;

but that doesn't matter,
   one man becomes a calculator,
another becomes a dictionary,
words are like math after all,
   it's just a case of different wiring.