From: Andrew Dunbar
Message: 3121
Date: 2004-07-14
> >define
> > > From: Mark E. Shoulson [mailto:mark@...]
> >
> > > It's a little strange to me that one would
> > > classify writing systems such that the basic
> > > category of a system changes like this, adding
> > > optional diacritics. I mean, yes, you can
> > > anything you like, but such an unstable systemBut it did catch on in 2 ways:
> > > starts to lose its usefulness. Whatever Hebrew
> > > is, it makes more sense to classify it the same
> > > whether or not it's pointed.
> >
> > I agree; otherwise, we can't classify scripts; we
> > can only classify runs of text.
>
> Or, maybe, Hebrew writing was transformed by the
> Masoretes, so now there are in fact two ways of
> writing Hebrew, the old-fashioned way, which
> retains most of its abjadity, and the new-fangled
> way, which never really did catch on, which pretty
> much achieves alphabeticity?
> > S ths Ltn wrtng n bjd?___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
> (a) Who writes that way?
>
> (b) I'm sick and tired of people demonstrating "how
> hard it is to read" vowelless English by leaving off
> an aleph-like marker from vowel-initial words.
>
> When you use that example in your textbook, make it
>
> " 's ths Ltn wrtng 'n 'bjd? "
> --
> Peter T. Daniels
> grammatim@...
>