fontgenerator.tech
Menu

Mathematical Script · U+1D4B6

Helloℋℯ𝓁𝓁ℴ

H and e here are two of the 11 legacy 'Letterlike Symbols' exceptions — real Unicode script letters, just from an older block.

Cursive Text Generator

Cursive-looking Unicode text comes from the Mathematical Script block. Eleven of its 52 letters were never assigned their own code point — Unicode reuses older 'Letterlike Symbols' characters for those instead, so this generator uses the exact glyph Unicode actually defines for each letter.

Showing a labeled sample preview. Type your own text, or .

Original text

Style your name, José 42

Coverage measures this generator's mappings, not device rendering or destination-app acceptance.

  • Cursive Script

    16/19 characters supported (84%)

    𝒮𝓉𝓎𝓁ℯ 𝓎ℴ𝓊𝓇 𝓃𝒶𝓂ℯ, 𝒥ℴ𝓈é 42

    3 character(s) kept as original text (not supported by this style).

    Details
    Letters
    A-Z, a-z (full, 11 letters use legacy script symbols)
    Digits
    Not supported

    B, E, F, H, I, L, M, R (uppercase) and e, g, o (lowercase) render using older ‘Letterlike Symbols’ characters instead of the main script block, because Unicode never assigned those 11 slots in the newer block. No dedicated script digits exist.

  • Bold Cursive Script

    16/19 characters supported (84%)

    𝓢𝓽𝔂𝓵𝓮 𝔂𝓸𝓾𝓻 𝓷𝓪𝓶𝓮, 𝓙𝓸𝓼é 42

    3 character(s) kept as original text (not supported by this style).

    Details
    Letters
    A-Z, a-z (full)
    Digits
    Not supported

    Unicode has no dedicated bold-script digit glyphs, so digits are preserved unchanged.

  • Gothic (Fraktur)

    16/19 characters supported (84%)

    𝔖𝔱𝔶𝔩𝔢 𝔶𝔬𝔲𝔯 𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔢, 𝔍𝔬𝔰é 42

    3 character(s) kept as original text (not supported by this style).

    Details
    Letters
    A-Z, a-z (full, 5 letters use legacy black-letter symbols)
    Digits
    Not supported

    C, H, I, R and Z render using older ‘Letterlike Symbols’ characters instead of the main Fraktur block, because Unicode never assigned those 5 slots. No dedicated Fraktur digits exist.

  • Bold Gothic (Fraktur)

    16/19 characters supported (84%)

    𝕾𝖙𝖞𝖑𝖊 𝖞𝖔𝖚𝖗 𝖓𝖆𝖒𝖊, 𝕵𝖔𝖘é 42

    3 character(s) kept as original text (not supported by this style).

    Details
    Letters
    A-Z, a-z (full)
    Digits
    Not supported

    Unicode has no dedicated bold-Fraktur digit glyphs, so digits are preserved unchanged.

What the characters actually are

𝒶Script a (standard)U+1D4B6
Script H (legacy exception)U+210B
Script e (legacy exception)U+212F
Script g (legacy exception)U+210A
𝓗Script Bold H (standard — no gaps)U+1D4D7
Fraktur C (legacy exception)U+212D
Fraktur H (legacy exception)U+210C
𝕳Fraktur Bold H (standard — no gaps)U+1D573

How to use it

  1. Type your text.
  2. Compare regular script against bold script, and script against the blackletter/Gothic 'fraktur' look.
  3. Copy the version you want.

Limitations and compatibility

  • Regular (non-bold) script: B, E, F, H, I, L, M, R (uppercase) and e, g, o (lowercase) render using legacy 'Letterlike Symbols' characters. They still look script-styled, but they come from a different, older part of Unicode than the other 41 letters — some fonts render them with a visibly different weight.
  • Fraktur: C, H, I, R and Z are legacy substitutions in the same way. Bold script and bold fraktur have no such gaps — all 52 letters are direct Unicode assignments.
  • None of the four styles have dedicated digit glyphs, so numbers stay in plain text.
  • Accented letters and non-Latin scripts are preserved unchanged rather than approximated.

Questions

Why do some cursive letters look different from the rest?

See the exception table in our cursive missing-letters guide — it's a known, documented Unicode chart gap, not a bug in this tool.

What's the difference between script and Fraktur?

Script is a flowing, handwriting-style cursive; Fraktur is a blackletter/Gothic style, more angular and traditionally associated with old German typography. Both are Latin-letter Unicode blocks, not different scripts or languages.

Which is more widely supported, script or Fraktur?

We don't have first-hand comparative testing between the two, but both draw from well-established Unicode ranges with broad modern font support; the legacy-character exceptions listed above are the main coverage difference to know about, not general availability.