This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
Why "Coöperation" instead of "Cooperation"? --Kimonandreou 16:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The diæresis indicates that the ‘oö’ is to be pronounced /ɔʊ.ɔ/, and not /uː/, in the same way that the diæresis in ‘naïve’ indicates that the word is to be pronounced /nɑ'iːv/, and not /neɪv/. Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 18:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. I've never seen this used before with this word (I have with naive/naïve). Is it perhaps not used in the US English? --Kimonandreou 20:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's used in neither US nor UK English, at least not in any significant amount for the past fifty years. In fact this article should probably be moved to a different title. Strad 22:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This spelling is functionally superior, for the reason given above. Furthermore, it avoids the dispute that can arise over whether to use the fused or the hyphenated spelling (cooperate / co-operate; each has its own advantages and disadvantages). By the way, The New Yorker, as well as some other publications, still uses a diæresis to spell coöperation and other words where one is necessary. Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 03:58, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The OSCE website spells it: The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Perhaps we should use the same. Personally, I don't care either way and I agree that most correct way of spelling it is with a diæresis but, if the organization itself spells its name a certain way, we should consider using the same spelling. --Kimonandreou 15:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that’s a whole different kettle of fish, as there is some Wikipedia policy somewhere which states that organisations, people, et cetera, ought to have their names spelt as they themselves spell it (if they show a preference). Therefore, if you want to move the article, feel free to do so; you shall receive no opposition from me. Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 20:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
