* mariano de vierna y. carles-tolra
|
| I will use the term *feature* as equivalent either to *articulatory*
| or to *acoustic* feature by wich a phonem may be defined.
What's the difference between those?
| I would understand by pure or proper "featural" a writing system in
| wich all *phonem* definitory *features* are represented (see below
| for more explanation). I would say that a particular individual
| symbol is featural if *it represents just one phonemic feature and
| not a phonem or if it is a compound, each of the compound elements
| represents one phonemic feature and all the features of that wich is
| represented by the compound are represented*.
|
| For example: the Japanese <"> is used as symbol for [+voiced] and de
| <ยบ> is used somewhat as symbol for [interrupted], so that both are
| featural symbols, that I would classify also as diacritics in that
| case.
This is very interesting. I've tried to read your post several times,
but it didn't come together for me before now. It seems that what I
wrote in my previous posting (in response to Peter C, describing how I
now understand "featural script") was correct. Can you confirm that?
| Japanese is a system logographic + syllabary with featural
| diacritics.
|
| (I use "logographic" as far as I do not know about reasons for
| another term).
I think they're called "logosyllabic" because sometimes the Kanji
represent words and sometimes they represent syllables, so the script
is not purely "logographic".
Ideogram everyone seems to agree is a misnomer.
| I think that Han-gul is featural as far as the same symbol may be reused
| to make another symbol (for example by doubling it) or a symbol is
| used together with anothers to mark a feature (for example for the
| aspirated phonems).
Right. So the doubling is another example of correlation between
graphical shape and phonetic features? And aspiration is another
example of a feature?
| But it is no featural with respect that there are symbols that
| represent by themselves an individual phonem -what is analogous with
| the phonemic (or alphabetic) and other systems- and because not all
| features are represented.
Right. So being a phonetic alphabet is not enough to make a system
featural? There has to be correspondences between graphical shapes and
general aspects of the sounds referred to?