--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham"
<richard.wordingham@...> wrote:

> --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "suzmccarth" <suzmccarth@...> wrote:
> >
> > I was only half-joking . Of course, it is the roman alphabet
> > arranged in syllables. (For those for whom this was a non-

functional

> > link.)
> >
> > They
> > > look like PR jobs to me:
> > >
> > > 'You can't handle a paleface alphabet? OK, try a syllabary.
> > That's
> > > the Native American thing!'
> >
> > I am uncomfortable with that interpretation - did Evans think of

it

> > as a native American thing? Was he familiar with the Cherokee
> > syllabary?
>
> I was referring to the 'syllabaries' based on the Roman alphabet

which

> seem to be nothing more than alphabets.

If the French and Italians use a row of syllables to teach literacy
then why is this a native/paleface issue?

It doesn't make the system a syllabary but the actual concrete
artefact is.

Walker was an anthropologist and he talked about syllabaries because
these American orthographies were arranged in a syllabary. He was
more interested in the institutional and social influence ofthe
innovators than he was in the type of system used.

"Willard Walker argued that "acceptance [of a writing system] by the
target population is contingent on four factors: 1) acceptance of
the innovators and others associated with the program, 2)
recognition on the part of the native community that literacy is
useful enough or fun enough to be worthwhile, 3) the acceptability
of the content of any literature produced, and 4) the acceptability
of the writing system" (1969: 149).

http://uncpress.unc.edu/chapters/bender_signs.html

Suzanne