Re: and how are they encoded?

--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...>
wrote:

> suzmccarth wrote:
> >
> > --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...>

> > I thought that Ethopic was the original abugida that the name

came

> > from, just like the name 'alphabet' came from Greek, or

wherever. So

> > Ethiopic would be the original abugida. And other systems that

are

> > supposed to be like the abugida are called an abugida, a system

that

> > is of the type abugida.
>
> No, suz. Have you really never read anything about the history of
> writing? The Indic scripts were introduced in the time of Ashoka,

3rd c.

> BCE; the vocalization of the Ethiopic script was introduce in the

4rg c.

> CE, probably under Indian influence.

Yes, I have read this. It is intuitive knowledge for anyone who
knows about the religious origins of writing systems. But why call
Indic scripts a type of an Ethiopic script, when one precedes the
other by several centuries. Or are we not supposed to know about
the Ethiopic script and its origins. If I have to read the book to
over ride every logical and intuitive idea that the term abugida
brings to mind it is unhelpful.

:>

> > On the Septuagint. It was a misunderstanding, a very simple and
> > unimportant misunderstanding. I thought, for example, a
> > transliteration for the first four Greek letters would be

a,b,g,d,

> > etc., vs. spelling out alpha, beta, gamma, delta.... So I thought
> > that the Greek transliteration of the actual Hebrew letters

aleph,

> > beth, gimel, .... etc would be the letter alpha, the letter beta,
> > the letter gamma, and so one including the letter omega which
> > parallels the hebrew letter vav. Those letters are there, also

the

>
> Did I not say, every time, "transliterations of the names of the

Hebrew

> letters"?
>
> > names of the letters. However, maybe we are looking a two

different

> > editions of the Septuagint. I just found it interesting to know

the

> > liturgical origins of the word. Another reason maybe for not

using

> > the word for Indic scripts.
>
> I am not looking at an edition of the Septuagint.

Let's resume this conversation when you are.

> --
> Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...