Michael Everson wrote:

>
> I intend to forward the following definitions to the Unicode Book
> Committee as improvements on the current definitions:
>
> Abjad. A writing system in which only consonants are indicated. The
> Phoenician script is a prototypical abjad; a better-known example is
> the Arabic writing system, though it is not a "pure" abjad because
> consonant letters like WAW and YEH can be used to mark long vowels
> /u:/ or /i:/. Some abjad writing systems optionally indicate vowels
> with the use of secondary marks on the consonants. The term "abjad"
> is derived from the first four letters of the traditional order of
> the Arabic script (ALIF, BEH, JEEM, DAL).

(Why are the Arabic letter names given in some colloquial? "beh" is
impossible in Standard Arabic; the name is baa'.)

> Alphabet. A writing system in which both both consonants and vowels
> are indicated. The most widespread and well-known example is the
> Latin writing system. The correspondence between letters and sounds
> may be either more or less exact. Many alphabets do not exhibit a
> one-to-one correspondence between distinct sounds and letters or
> groups of letters used to represent them; often this is an indication
> of original spellings which were not changed as the language changed.
> The term "alphabet" is derived from the first two letters of the
> Phoenician script (ALF, BET).

No it isn't; it's from the first two letters of the Greek script.

(And the Phoenician would be ALP.)

> I am satisfied with both of these as being suitable with regard to
> the aims of the Unicode glossary, though I would entertain comment
> about whether Phoenician ALF, BET is going to be controversial or
> not. The alternative is Greek ALPHA, BETA.
>
> I will now turn to the definition of Abugida on a different thread.

--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...