suzmccarth wrote:

>
> >From Peter Constable in November, 2001
>
> "1. phonic/phonemic: structural units represent a phonological
> segment at some level in the derivation
> 1a. abjad: consonants only (e.g. prototypical example: ancient
> Semitic scripts)
> 1b. alphabets: consonants, and vowels (e.g. Latin)
>
> 2. syllabic: structural units represent a phonological syllable

How does this not cover (3) and (4) as well?

> 2a. syllabary: no systematic relationship between shapes (e.g.
> Hiragana)
> 2b. abugida: regular relationship between shapes that corresponds to
> a regular relationship between phonemes (e.g. Ethiopic, Cdn
> Syllabics)

Insufficiently precise; it misses the point almost entirely.

> 3. alphasyllabary: two levels of structural unit representing
> phonemes and syllables (prototypical example: Hangul)

That certainly doesn't agree with Bill Bright's usage, who coined the
term (as far as anyone can tell).

> 4. logosyllabary: structural units represent syllables and/or
> morphemes (e.g. Chinese ideographs)"

Why "and/or"?

> Now that I am forbidden from using 'that word', which I have grown
> to like, by the way, I will have to restrict myself to quoting
> others.

Even if others misuse the word?
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...