From: Peter T. Daniels
Message: 5042
Date: 2005-05-04
>He says he's a qalam lurker, and he hasn't been returning phone calls
> --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...>
> >wrote:
>
> > See the publications of Konrad Tuchscherer.
>
> Thanks. I don't know this.
> > "It seems"?Does he believe the alphabet is the most advanced?
>
> A rhetorical use of the word seems.
>
> >Do you not know David Dalby's articles? See Singler's
> > bibliography in WWS.
> >
> > How did Taylor, <snip> "suppress" literacy? Isaac Taylor was
> > a Durham (IIRC) cathedral canon and antiquarian.
>
> No, Suppress use of syllabics. If you believe that the alphabet is
> the most advanced then a syllabary must be less advanced.
> >Sampson is a right-wingI don't think Gelb would have said otherwise, if he'd ever expressed an
> > ideologue who used to dabble in linguistics. (He's moved on to
> fighting
> > with the Chomskyans full-time in "cognitive science.")
>
> So I saw on his website!
>
> Maybe just happenstance, but he and others by the 1980's were saying
> that phonographic writing whether alphabetic or syllabic was equally
> suitable for literacy.
> > For anyone who needed to produce literacy materials (such as BibleThere are fewer than 86 (or 84 or 88) symbols, no?
> > translations). There are no Mende typewriters.
>
> But there were Syllabics typewriters in Canada, newspapers, bibles,
> newsletters, etc.
> > Do you have any evidence that anyone thought "syllabary bad,where "modernity" presumably includes typewriters.
> alphabet
> > good"?
>
> Andre Sjoberg expressed what I perceived to be the accepted belief in
> the 1960's that the alphabet was most suited to literacy and
> modernity. Therefore a syllabary would be less suited.
> Certainly university linguists, 70's and 80's were determined to makeYou mean, make orthographies more phonemic?
> Cree and other native literacies more phonemic and they really felt
> it would be better to use the alphabet. They were not trying toHis History of Science (4v.) is available on Gutenberg -- the zip files
> suppress anything, they just wanted to promote literacy and thought
> that an alphabet would be better than syllabics. Cree typewriters
> were available but by this time, the early 80's the issue was the
> computerization of all dictionaries and other linguistic material.
>
> This is defintiely not a criticism of these linguits, but just to
> comment on what I saw as a trend.
>
> >I was hoping a while back that he would
> > > know about G.Vico, who wrote about writing systems in the early
> 18th
> > > century.
> >
> > He did??? Where, and what did he say?
>
> I'll have to respond to this later - I don't have much.
> >
> > Can you tell me anything about the Henry Smith Williams *History of the
> > Art of Writing*
>
> Another book of Williams is on the interent in its entirety and
> mentions his view of the alphabet. I'll find it later.