Peter_Constable@... wrote:

>
> On 11/06/2001 10:53:43 PM "Peter T. Daniels" wrote:
>
> >Don't you know the diagrams of the vocal tract with the Korean
> letters
> >superimposed? Those aren't modern fabrications; they're
> (descriptions,
> >not pictures) in the founding document of 1443.
>
> Yes. But that does not mean that the jamo structural unit corresponds
> to a phonological feature; it corresponds to a phoneme. The jamo
> choseong kiyeok does not stand for velar point of articulation; it
> doesn't get combined with other jamos meaning oral stop and voiceless
> to represent the phoneme /k/. It alone represents the phonome /k/.
>
> The significance of the vocal tract diagrams is only that the *graphic
> shape* of jamos (only some at that) have a metaphoric connection with
> velar point of articulation. It does not mean that these structural
> units represent phonological features.
>
> The jamos are alphabetic. The hangul writing system has structural
> units corresponding to phonemes and syllables. It seems fitting, then,
> to call it an alphasyllabary.
>
> There is no writing system that is featural in the sense that the
> structural units represent phonological features.

So who ever said there was?

Tilting at windmills, or attacking straw men.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...