Re: Neosyllabaries

suzmccarth wrote:

>
> --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...> wrote:
>
> >it was Taylor who
> > first, AFAICT, introduced the tripartite classification (1883/1899).
>
> I actually saw a copy of Taylor for sale on the internet but when I
> enquired they said they couldn't find it. Too bad. It isn't in our

Do you remember the price? I make do with a photocopy of Columbia's 1899
ed. It seems like it would have been a sure bet for a Dover reprint, but
they didn't.

> library but Jensen is, in English and German, dated 1969. I haven't
> seen it yet.
>
> > I suspect you're addressing me, even though you quote only yourself
> > above.
>
> It was intended as a follow up. However, it is true that I don't know
> how to keep a conversation in its own thread very well. It seems that
> with technology everyone has different areas that they are strong or
> weak in. I will work on this skill.

You "Quote" a text, then remove everything you're not responding
directly to.

> > How do you manage to overlook the footnote to that very passage?
>
> I was refering to the footnote.

One editor can't very well castigate the other editor in their joint
book, can he? If you read between the lines, it's perfectly clear. (Just
as the Translator's Preface to Briant's history of the Persian Empire
makes it clear that the promised cooperation from the author was not
forthcoming, without actually saying so.)

> I have been looking at some other websites over the weekend and I find
> that in general, classification is by formal and abstract features.
> The organization of the script into syllables is considered a surface
> phenomenon.
>
> So I concede that I am in the minority in putting as much emphasis on
> the 'surface phenomenon' as I do. It doesn't mean that I am not aware
> of the formal aspects but I have a different perspective.

--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...