suzmccarth wrote:
> Question to Peter;
> It's not that I am not familiar with the difference between
> different writing systems. It is the taxonomy i am confused about.
> I was thinking:
> 1. syllabaries – logosyllabaries, syllabaries and
> alphasyllabaries, (abugidas)
> 2. alphabets – morphophonemic, phonemic and abjads
> Former Models
> A In the 1950's and 60's
> Evolutionary: 1. Logographic, 2. syllabic and 3. alphabets
> Remember Sjoberg, 1966 "The alphabet was the highest and most
> modern type of writing, the most suited to mass literacy and
> modernization, the goals of a democratic society". (1950's)For
> Diringer and Gelb alphabets were the `culmination' of
> a `progression'.
> B In the 80's – early 90's (G. Sampson, H. Rogers) was:
> 1. phonographic – alphabets and syllabaries
> 2. logographic - Chinese
> C Then, of course, there was the `the essential unity that embraces
> all writing systems'. (Unger and Defrancis)
> So my question to Peter is, what is the current taxonomy, or
> hierarchical arrrangement.

"Current" with whom?

See the first section of WWS for an overview of typologies.

Do you see some sort of contradiction among the three schemes you list?

Which go back at least to Isaac Taylor in 1883.
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...