Now banish the pathetic。 from public discourses, and you reduce the speakers merely to modern eloquence; that is, to good sense, delivered in proper expression.
Hume, On Eloquence

There are lots of this sort of old marks in this article by David Hume. I am totally at a loss what function this special mark has.


It is an "Ideographic Full Stop"1

In some Asian languages, notably Chinese and Japanese, a small circle is used instead of a solid dot: "。" [Source]

@KaiserOctavius encouraged me to search a bit more and although most of the links I found searching that quote didn't have the "。", one result did have the "degree sign" °.

On that page, it appears the author was just using these marks as links to the glossary, indeed, clicking the symbol took me to a glossary entry for pathetic.

enter image description here

1. I didn't get this as a linguist, I got this is a programmer! I found a "Character to ASCII converter" and used that to find out the hexadecimal ID of the character, then I used another online tool to find out the character's name, then googled that name. Rinse and repeat for other unknown characters

  • 1
    Clearly that is not its function here. – Kaiser Octavius Sep 22 '13 at 8:22
  • 2
    That doesn't mean that's not what the character is. The mark itself may be error. It's worth noting that when I google the quote, most results don't have that mark and those that do are links to this question. – James Webster Sep 22 '13 at 8:28
  • 2
    Rightly so, your downvote was justified and had the beneficial effect of me looking for another, better answer. – James Webster Sep 22 '13 at 8:39
  • 1
    It is fairly common for words in a text to be highlighted as being defined in a glossary with the degree sign (I am currently setting a book that does the exact same thing). I admit I haven’t seen the ideographic full stop used in this manner before, but it’s not much of a stretch. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Sep 22 '13 at 10:41
  • 1
    @JanusBahsJacquet: I think I have seen the symbol "°" used for links to a glossary or some such; now I wonder why one would use this symbol and not something else, such as an asterisk or a dagger, or underline the word, or use small capitals. Any idea? It seems to be a rather recent invention. – Cerberus_Reinstate_Monica Sep 22 '13 at 14:33

If I might clarify James Webster's point, I think the lesson here is that the questioner's source (directly or indirectly) is a modern electronic version which included hyperlinks to editorial notes, and he or she is mistakenly interpreting the hyperlinks as 'old marks' in the original.

  • 1
    Yes, you are totally right. I mistook it as an old mark. – benlogos Sep 23 '13 at 6:46

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.