Re: [OT] ANN: Site about scripts

[Peter_Constable]

>> >Ethiopic and Canadian Syllabics and Tengwar are featural.
>>
>> I have never heard anyone suggest any script other than Hangul to be
>> featural. Please explain.
>
>If you examine the UCAS, you'll see that the orientation of the
>base consonant symbols (rotationally), and the placement of the
>dots (or dashes), correlate with the vowellings of the syllables.

Which it would seem means that this has properties of an abugida, I would have thought.


>Ethiopic, examined as a syllabary, has some of the same kinds
>of characteristics as UCAS. The placement of the flags and
>loops correlates with the vowel ranks,

and for this reason I had heard Ethiopic described as an abugida. So what, then, is the difference between a featural syllabary and an abugida?


>and the placement of the
>top "butterflies" corresponds with manner or other distinctions among
>the consonant ranks.

Writing systems for Mayan languages often add an apostrophe after a consonant to indicate glottalised forms; writing systems of many languages use a tilde over vowels to indicate nasalistion; many W. African languages use grave and acute to indicate tone levels; etc. Does that make all of these writing systems featural?



- Peter


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable

Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>