> Luciano Perondi wrote:
> > I think that in chinese could have the role of "atoms" also the
> basic
> > strokes (bi hua), that form the elements such as "女" and "�R".
>
> But the brush strokes do not bear any recognizable function. Such an
> analysis is only visual, not functional. See my reply to P.T. Daniels.

That's the reason why I was speaking of double (multiple) articulation.
I inverted the order of articulation following the list of articulation
by Rossi-Landi.
first & second level: visual function (atoms=lines & dots, and
semifinished products*=strokes),
third level: smallest meaningful units (radicals and
basic-characters-not radicals; graphemes? I don't know!).

*semilavorati

>
> "articUlation"
> (But did Martinet really invent the term? I though that the "double
> articulation" had already been used by de Saussure.)

I don't know. May be.
I know that Martinet explained his idea of "double articulation" in
"Eléments de linguistique générale":

"On entend souvent dire que le langage humain est articulé (...) . Il
convient toutefois de préciser cette notion d'articulation du langage
et de noter qu'elle se manifeste sur deux plans différents (...)."



LP