Michael Everson wrote:

> It is true that the specific way Han characters are drawn


<big ...>

> >As with the typology, I'm saying that maybe _every_ term doesn't have to
> >be tried to be applied to _every_ case. Maybe "script" isn't a useful
> >term in discussing Japanese at all, since Japanese is so sui generis.
> I think we're back to misunderstanding terminology. The Japanese
> language has a particular orthography, which makes use of the
> Katakana syllabary, the Hiragana syllabary, a subset of the huge
> number of CJK characters which exist, and occasionally of the Latin
> alphabet and other symbols.
> >It's the computer engineers who insist on utterly dividing up the
> >universe into watertight compartments such that every entity has its
> >very own assignment, and there are no empty areas and no overlaps.
> >That ain't the way human minds work.
> Sure it is.

Isn't. Language ain't logical.

> Hiragana and Katakana and Kanji and Romaji have different
> names because they act and interact differently in Japanese
> orthography.

Precisely. They are not four avatars of some single thing called a
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...