Re: Second invention of the alphabet?

Peter T. Daniels wrote:

>Michael Everson wrote:
>
>
>>At 18:56 -0400 2004-05-27, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Neither veyz nor ey appears in the WWS list of names;
>>>
>>>
>>So? WWS is not perfect. The names I gave come from Weinreich's
>>College Yiddish, YIVO Institute 1971 (5th revised edition, 7th
>>printing 1990)
>>
>>
>
>Does he claim the name of <t> is <dof>?
>

I assume not, because nobody pronounces it that way. It's <tof> or
<sof>, depending on the spirantization. But people DO say "veyz".

>>>and those "points" are not used in Yiddish orthography, only letters
>>>in which the Hebrew points with those names appear are. In Yiddish,
>>>they're not separable from the "consonants" on which they ride.
>>>
>>>
>>Sorry, Peter, that's a dodge. Just because they are obligatory
>>doesn't mean they aren't the points QAMATS and PATAH.
>>
>>
>
>They were, historically. In Yiddish, they aren't.
>
>
>
>>>I still don't know what "SIN DOT in SIN" is.
>>>
>>>
>>Shin with a dot indicating it is [s] not [S].
>>
>>
>
>A dot inside a shin is a dagesh, indicating a lengthened shin, not a
>sin.
>

In Hebrew; Yiddish doesn't know a "strong" dagesh from a hole in the
paper. A Shin with a dot *over its left side* is a Sin (yes, it's
called that in Hebrew and in Yiddish, not "Shin with a Sin dot." When
trying to be specific, I've seen it called a "Left Sin", as opposed to a
"Right Shin"--referring to the position of the dots--and in such cases
the full-spelling "Sin" is spelled with a *Samech*)

~mark