From: Peter T. Daniels
Message: 4925
Date: 2005-04-27
>Sproat is a liar, or has a _very_ peculiar sense of "commonly used." The
> --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "suzmccarth" <suzmccarth@...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham"
> > <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:
> >
> > > Given all these issues, I wonder whether it does make sense to think
> > > of Thai as an alphasyllabary.
>
> > Is Thai taught as a syllabary - with a syllable chart? This may
> > sound a bit mechanistic, but in the scripts that I am thinking of -
>
> > Cree, Tamil, Hangul, Amharic, the script is usually taught as a
> > syllabary.
>
> Sproat finds it relevant that these scripts are taught as
> syllabaries and have the syllable as their organizing principle.
>
> "Indic scripts are particularly interesting in this regard sincethey
> are clearly segmental in their abstract design, and yet the
> (orthographic) syllable plays an important role; hence the commonly
> used term alphasyllabary (Bright, 1996a). More importantly, perhaps,
> they are frequently taught as syllabaries (Karanth, 2003)14I wonder why everyone quotes Alice and no one quotes me saying exactly
> something that would surely affect literate speakers' conscious
> phonological awareness.
>
> The strongest position on this issue is perhaps the one taken by
> Faber(Faber, 1992). Faber explicitly argues that phonemic
> segmentation is an epiphenomenon due to alphabetic writing (page
> 111): investigations of language use suggest that many
> speakers do not divide words into phonological segments
> unless they have received explicit instruction in such segmentation
> comparable to that involved in teaching an alphabetic
> writing system."
> However, there are other considerations aside from the pedagogical.Do you have any evidence for this "interpretation" of the word? The word
>
> Another important factor is how people classify their own system.
> Indic scripts are generally called aksharas, While this may have
> originally had a meaning like 'a' to 'z' or 'a' to 'ksha', it is
> now generally accepted that an akshara is a syllable. So this isAn akshara comprises all the C's in up to a CCCCCV sequence, and all
> the feature that defines the script type for its users.
>
> The akshara connotes wholeness I believe. Since the syllable can be
> pronounced, it can be matched up to the visible syllable.
> Representation of speech by the visible syllable is perceived to beThat's not exactly peculiar to Cree.
> less remote than representation of speech by an alphabetic
> sequence. The relationship is between the smallest audible unit of
> speech which can be produced in isolation and the symbol which
> represents it.
>
> In this case the cultural understanding of the relationship between
> speech and writing is altered. FOr the Cree they often talked about
> the syllabic script as "the language for the Indian people the same
> as whites have to learn their language." There is a sense of
> semantic identity between script and language. Bennett and Berry
> 1987.