Re: Pahawh Hmong

Lars Marius Garshol wrote:

>
> * Peter T. Daniels
> |
> | Certainly you'll get more out of Smalley et al.'s book than from
> | Martha's 5-page summary of it!
>
> I doubt it not, but WWS is all I have, unfortunately.
>
> | Do you realize that there are three distinct stages in the script,
> | and she has to discuss them all in that very small space?
>
> I do, and I'm not complaining about her summary. The problem is more
> my lack of linguistic knowledge than her account, I would say.
>
> | It certainly is an abugida, but of a unique type -- [...]
>
> Hmmm. That's an interesting statement. Could you explain why you think
> so?

A symbol represents a specific vowel plus a neutral consonant -- and the
consonant is modified by prefixing a symbol for a different consonant.

That's totally parallel to the standard abugida, where

a symbol represents a specific consonant plus a neutral vowel -- and the
vowel is modified by adjoining a symbol for a different vowel.

Same idea, but clearly not based on the closest available models, Lao
and Thai!
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...