From: Michael Everson
Message: 1900
Date: 2003-12-13
>John Hudson wrote:Lots of people who have to or want to actually use these things do
> > For me, these subsets of signs are respectively the Latin alphabet and the
>> English alphabet. You appear to be using script as a generic term,
>> interchangeable with any of the more precise terms alphabet, syllabery,
>> abugida, etc.; whereas I, and I suspect various other people in this
>> discussion, would be more inclined to use the term 'writing system' in this
>> generic way (the Latin writing systems = the Latin alphabet), and reserve
>> the term script for the superset of signs from which particular writing
>> systems are derived. I've found this usage useful, and obviously others
>> have as well; if you have a better terminology that describes the
>> relationship of the particular to the general in this way, please tell us.
>
>Why would I use a term for something that doesn't need to be referred to?