--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "suzmccarth" <suzmccarth@...> wrote:

>
> --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham"
> <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Constable"
> <petercon@...> wrote:
>
> > > An abugida is a type of script, characterized (roughly -- I'm
> sure I'll
> > > be corrected if there is a more preferred definition) by having
> > > syllables with the same initial consonant written using a
> single form
> > > for the consonant with various marks modifying that
> consonant form to
> > > signify the syllable rhymes.
> >
> > I beleive Peter Daniels would insist that the absence of a
> modifying
> > mark signified some specific ('implicit' or 'inherent') vowel
> rather
> > than zero.
>
> I read recently that for devnagri the half-form is the dead
> consonant because the full form is considered to be a
> representation of the consonant on the left *plus* a residual or
> historic representation of the short a on the right, for some
> letters. That is, the right hand side of some consonants is
> actually the short a. This rationalizes the use of the half form as
> the bare consonant.

I've not heard that. What I do remember is that when I first dabbled
with Sanskrit, I was using a very old text book that did not
explicitly mention half-forms at all. Instead, the general rule was
to stack the consonants. The rationale seems more to be that there is
but one stem per akshara. There may be a general trend to minimising
the depth of these vertical stacks by use of such tricks as half-forms.

The explanation you've heard sounds more like a rationalisation of the
practice of using half-forms.

> So I am wondering what "inherent" means - 'normally
> represented with' - or 'unrepresented'?

Certainly for the mainland SE Asian scripts the 'inherent' means
present unless there is an indication to the contrary. In these
scripts, the first consonant is usually written in full, and it is the
subsequent consonants that are abbreviated.

Richard.