hrm.. I've lost track of the original message I wanted to reply to,
but, I'm kind of curious as to why the Phajhauj script is all that
odd... I mean, how do you classify the <bopomofo>/<zhuyin fuhao> used
in Chinese?
Both have a bifurcated system where onsets and rhymes are separately
encoded by graphemes; tone is incorporated into both systems - by
diacritics marked on the rhyme in <zhuyin fuhao> and two sets of
graphemes PLUS diacritics in Phajhauj; etc... the only odd thing
about the Phajhauj seems to be the relative "backwards" ordering of
components - where <zhuyin fuhao> follows an "alphabetic" linearity
of {onset > [rhyme+tone]}, it's merely reversed in Phajhauj, where
{[rhyme+tone] > onset}, in spite of syllables reading from left-to-
right.
I don't recall whether Devanagari (Thai, Lao, Burmese, etc.) was
listed as/discussed to be a "bidi" script due to the variable
position of some vocalic graphemes with respect to positioning of the
consonantal grapheme, but, if so, then sure, Phajhauj would have to
be considered "bidi" only in that it does not conform to the same
expectations of which segment of a syllable must be identified and
written prior to another.
or.. have I completely missed the point here? (apologies, if I
have...)
-patrick
Next in thread: 1574 Previous message: 1555 Next message: 1557