Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> > But, then, is it still an abjad if it has matres lectionis?
>
> It's moving away from abjadicity.

Fine. But, then, why is an abjad called "abjad", i.e. with the traditional
name of a writing system, Arabic, which has moved away so much from
abjadicity?

Wouldn't it be clearer to call an abjad just "Phoenician", standing that
Phoenician is the only example of a real abjad?

--
Marco