Re: Typology and classification Re: everything else

Berthold Frommann wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
> > Not alphabets: 16, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 29, 30, 32
> Why are 20 (Manchu) and 25 (Mongolian) not alphabets?
> (I wouldn't separate them, though).
> Mainly the Chinese claim that Mongolian is syllabic and not alphabetic, but
> others say that it is definitely an alphabet. So do I.

The script never changed in anything but letterform as it passed all the
way across Asia. It uses matres just about the same way as Aramaic did
2000 years earlier.

Syllabic, it certainly isn't!
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...