Do italics used as conveying certain inflection translate to

>>8680071
Even in English the better practice is to rearrange the sentence so the emphasis is natural.

>>8680071
Pretty sure the brackets is their way of emphasizing, the english version is italics.
And i'm pretty sure italics is used in most, if not all, languages using the roman alphabet.

>>8680142
No, that doesn't work, you'd know that if you just tried it.
Also, it'd be extremely restricting prose-vise

>>8680162
I'd like to think it can be achieved by someone talented.

>>8680165
It can be heavily implied, but not much more.

>>8680168
If you believe that then the idea that emphasis is only possible to convey with italics is a lot more restrictive prose-wise...

>>8680177
First of all, i don't believe that, and second: no it isn't.

>>8680177
Being able to convey emphasis by constructing the sentence a certain way vs. Emphasizing by using italics and constructing the sentence however you like.
Hmmm.

>>8680181
I mean, having italics only vs. italics + other means is a pretty clear victory for options.

>>8680191
Wait, it sounded more like you were arguing no italics vs italics and other means.

>>8680187
>>8680181
Ah just misunderstood, nvm pardon me.

>>8680142
>>Even in English the better practice is to rearrange the sentence so the emphasis is natural.
false. but only typographers and good writers can pull it off. the pleb should stay away from typography and in fact does not even learn it. writing on the internet where typography is raped at each message makes the pleb even less able to reflect on how to write properly.

Japanese sometimes uses a katakana or unusual kanji for emphasis.

>>8680071
Brackets in Japanese are quotes. They also have a separate alphabet that can be used like italics, including writing foreign words and emphasizing Japanese words.

>>8680168
>heavily implied

>>8681159
Ooh, versatile~

in Latin you can place a word at the beginning of a sentence to emphasize it

ewqwq