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

> > > There is a HUGE difference between having 50-100 different
> > > characters, each for a separate syllable with no similarity
between the
> > > characters for similar-sounding syllables, and having 20-30
> > > characters, each of which takes on a handful of (up to a dozen)
> > > modifications, with similar character-bases and similar
> > > reflecting phonetic similarity.
> >
> > Cree slips in or out of your definition of an abugida every single
> > time you post.
> You are truly the mistress of the non sequitur.

You know very well that your paragraph above includes Cree as an
abugida, which is a reversal from your preceding post. Do I need to
point this out?

> I have said more than once that Cree isn't really a candidate for
> typology at all,

Alas, I now realize that I am not familiar with any script that is
really a candidate for any typology. Hebrew, Arabic, Tamil, Korean,
Cree. All are in some way UNUSUAL.

At least Greek is still an alphabet.

Suzanne McCarthy