This article presumes the word-shape model if reading, which most reading psychologists believe to be inaccurate. The parallel-letter recognition article has the most experimental support. This paper by a reading psychologist at Microsoft (http://www.microsoft.com/typography/ctfonts/wordrecognition....) has a good summary of the models and experimental evidence.
I've been interested in the caps issue for a while. I'm a native Hebrew speaker, and Hebrew doesn't have the idea of Capital letters - there is only one set.
I wonder why caps were even important. I mean, it's just another set of the same letters, what's it for?
After a while, I did find some uses for it. Namely, when reading books, if you come across a name you don't recognize (say, the name of a person), in Hebrew you can't tell that it's a name; for all you know, it's a word that you don't recognize and not a name.
I think the existence of capitals has more to do with history and less with utility. As you said, it’s not obvious why you would need capitals.
The Romans started with nothing but what we today know as capitals [1] (imported from elsewhere but that is another story). Everyone who needs to write a lot and fast (e.g. merchants) will optimize the letters for this purpose and thus dramatically change how the letters look. That’s how the Romans got their cursive [2]. If, on the other hand, your task is to chisel letters into stone or copy a book you can be extra diligent, an opportunity to clean up letterforms [3].
Those two writing styles – cursive and capitals – were not intended to be combined with each other. It’s only later, in medieval times, that both letterforms are used together [4].
It dates to the medieval copyists---mostly monks---who developed new ways of writing that were faster. In some cases the letters connected (what we'd call cursive), sometimes just flowed (italic), sometimes they were just shorter and rounder (uncial/half-uncial). The dominant form was this new style. BUT, for the beginnings of chapters and/or pages, they would revert to the old Latin letters, often with a great deal of decoration. Thus the capitals remained in active use even as the running text evolved. The printing press narrowed the number of distinct styles somewhat, but even today if you look at handwriting across Europe, the capitals are pretty recognisable and would look familiar to an ancient Roman, but the rest of the text diverges a lot.
...which doesn't exactly answer your question of what it's "for", I guess. But to some extent, we have two cases because that's what history gave us, and now we make use of them as best we can.
In this context, the German use of caps is interesting. They capitalize every noun, and I believe that such a use has been proven to allow for speedier reading than the capital use in other Western languages (i.e. English).
It was common until the 19th century to capitalize all nouns in English as well.
I've found in reading older text that it doesn't noticeably affect the speed of comprehension, but the capitalization of nouns does seem to subtly shift the emphasis away from the action being described by the sentence and toward the things taking part in it.
Hindi doesn't have capital letters either. I think we recognize a name more by it's context than the case of the first letter. If I found a hindi word I didn't recognize, I would still be able to tell if it were a name or not. Perhaps caps exist for purely stylistic reasons.
I wonder what would happen if someone did a design study of showing all caps vs sentence case text to people who have never seen English. Wonder which one would they say looks better.
Sometimes it is OK to use all caps. This is pointed out in the article, but worth noting again. You might want your text to read more as a shape. For instance, when using section headers that you want to be more uniform in appearance.
The vertical edge shape contrast has also been noted to have an effect on comprehension (as in ragged right vs full justification). A few resources/papers:
The TL;DR version for those who don't want to bother with the links:
Full justification creates "rivers" of white space (effectively spaces above and below that partially line up forming a white line snaking down part of the page).
The eye has a tendency to follow these down the page which leads to either skim reading (you just resume reading where the river stops) or having to go back and reread and not get caught by the river this time.
Either obviously compromise the information you're taking in.
I wonder though if this applies to languages like chinese or japanese. I know nothing about them but I'm pretty sure CAPS don't get any bigger. Does that make the language harder to comprehend?
I would have liked a more in-depth analysis personally.
Since there is no concept of CAPS in Chinese, I assume you mean that Chinese and Japanese characters are more or less square-shaped (thus less "shape contrast" from the linked article), are they harder to read? The answer is probably no for natives, but yes if you are used to latin-based languages.
One thing to note though is that there are so-called half-width and full-width symbols in most Chinese fonts (I think it's the same in CJK, but not very sure).
These are half-width symbols (normal symbols):
1234567890 ALL CAPS sucks
There are full-width counterparts (if your system and display them):
１２３４５６７８９０ ＡＬＬ ＣＡＰＳ ｓｕｃｋｓ
Half-width and full-width chars get their names due to the fact in a monospace Chinese font, two half-width chars will take the same space as one full-width char. This makes alignment easier.
By now it's pretty safe to say using full-width chars is a bad idea. The readability is so low and mixed Chinese and English content is so common that people don't tolerate the ugly full-width chars any more. The norm right now seems to mix monospace Chinese glyphs (all Chinese chars have same width) with proportional latin glyphs. Unfortunately most Chinese fonts come with really ugly latin glyphs, and the remedy is to specify a latin font first (Arial and Verdana are the two most popular choices) and fallback to some Chinese font.
How do you mean how this applies to languages like chinese and Japanese? Do you mean that Japanese and Chinese have capital letter, or are you referring to english letters written in all caps read by a native Japanese/Chinese speaker?
In Japan(I don't know about china) it is very common for english words to be written in all caps when surrounded by Japanese characters. they will also (in many cases) be written in full-spaced letters, which only have capital versions: ＡＢＣＤＥ vs ABCDE. I've never seen it cause a problem, but I think this is more because Japanese speakers are not native english speakers, so their hesitation with an unfamiliar script would outweigh any recognition delay from it being written in all caps.
However, I do know that sentences that are written purely in katakana are much slower for native speakers to read, as it's a script that is used much less than kanji or hiragana. I would hesitate to say that reading an all-katakana sentence is more troublesome for a native jp speaker than a native english speaker reading something written in all caps.
Japanese is a language with three alphabets, theres not much room for comparison when talking about All Caps.
These three alphabets can all be used in the same sentence.
Readability for Japanese is a whole different science. They have their own fonts, no all caps, characters comprised of 30 individual strokes, top-to-bottom-right-to-left writing, but also horizontal reading.
One of the biggest readability issues for Japanese would be which characters are used would be my guess.
You need to know 2000 characters before you can start reading the newspaper.
As an English person we can read every word, but might not know the meaning of sparingly used words. In Japanese you might nit even be able to read it, or you might even misread it. (characters can be read differently based on the character next to it)
By the way Japanese don't encounter all katakana sentences, since it's just used for the 'imported' words.
>By the way Japanese don't encounter all katakana sentences, since it's just used for the 'imported' words.
As patio mentions, that's a common misconception.
When computers were first being developed for Japan, they used a half-width katakana font in order to fit in a smaller byte-size, and also be able to be displayed on small screens such as cash registers. This has carried over, and many appliances, printers, atms, etc still use the half-width katakana for display. It is truly a pain in the butt.
Sometimes all-katakana sentences are also used in books for when robots, aliens or foreigners are talking in order to give the speech a halting or "non-japanese" feel to it. I personally find it obnoxious, and like the Full Metal Alchemist way of dealing with it, where they only changed the last character of each line into katakana.
Katakana can also be used as english-speakers would use italics (or even all caps) in order to put stress on a certain word in a sentence.
かれのスタイルはサイコー！
>You need to know 2000 characters before you can start reading the newspaper.
Honestly, for foreigners this is considered a huge hurdle, but 2000 characters is nothing. Especially for a native, who will have about 12~ years of learning before they start reading newspapers, it's really not a big deal.
Especially for a native, who will have about 12~ years of learning before they start reading newspapers, it's really not a big deal.
Assuming the 12 years of education happen! Consider that the amount of education one needs to be literate in Japanese is more than the amount of education it takes to be literate in, say, French, English or Spanish.
Note I'm not saying one is better than the other, just that they're different.
By the way Japanese don't encounter all katakana sentences
Well, printer status boxes, bank ATM receipts, older pagers, etc. ヨウシガキラシテオリマス is really obnoxious to read, particularly when it is rotating over the printer status dialog. (After a minute or two, I figured it out: "Out of paper.")
The educational social systems we have train us to become better used to reading words in sentence case. I'm yet to see a study on little kids struggling to read in all caps before anything else. Give us something on this before concluding...
i have no problem with all caps. what really annoys me is when people don't use proper capitalization at the beginning of a sentence. what really makes me angry is when people defend this style with the "e. e. cummings used to do it" excuse. i can't parse paragraphs like these.
It is just a bit harder to recognize words written in caps.
When we're reading, we aren't recognizing each character and then combining them unconsciously into a word and then you comprehend it. We just recognize the words at once, and stops on an unfamiliar or out of context ones, which usually signals a misreading.
So, people are using caps when they need to EMPHASIZE something. ^_^
This article is trying to emphasize that the author cold understand things, that the rest of the world cannot. ^_^
