John Hudson wrote:
> At 05:28 AM 12/12/2003, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >Is there reason to believe that this is a writing system, that is, a set
> >of graphic symbols and rules for their use, such that any utterance in
> >its language can be reproduced identically without the intervention of
> >the utterer?
> To confirm the implication of this definition: you are saying that all
> writing systems must be in some way phonetically based, and that
> non-phonetically based sets of graphic symbols and rules for their use are
> *not* writing systems?

Of course. Have you read _nothing_ I've published? Or, for that matter,
John DeFrancis?
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...