From: Mark E. Shoulson (mark@kli.org)
Date: Wed Apr 28 2004 - 22:48:23 EDT
Kenneth Whistler wrote:
>Dean,
>
>
>
>For the Aramaic script continuum there are two potential easy
>answers:
>
>1. Hebrew is already encoded, so just use Hebrew letters for
>everything and change fonts for every historical variety.
>
>2. Encode a separate repertoire for each stylistically distinct
>abjad ever recorded in the history of Aramaic studies, from
>Proto-Canaanite to modern Hebrew (and toss in cursive Hebrew, for
>that matter), starting with Tables 5.1, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5 of
>Daniels and Bright and adding whatever you wish to that.
>
>But the *correct* answer is likely to be the hard one that carves
>up that continuum into some useful small set of repertoires to
>be encoded as separate "scripts" and identifies each of the
>abjad varieties to be associated with each respective "script",
>so that extant texts can be correctly encoded in an
>interoperable way.
>
>
>
>>I'm not saying we shouldn't encode the "landmarks" in the Canaanite
>>script continuum;
>>
>>
>
>You aren't? Good. Then instead of objecting on generic grounds
>to the Phoenician proposal, answer the following question:
>
>A. Does Phoenician constitute a "landmark" in the Canaanite
> script continuum? Yes/No
>
>And once you answer that question, perhaps you can contribute to
>a specification of what the rest of the list of appropriate "landmarks"
>consists of.
>
This is really what it all boils down to. The script spectrum is
inarguably a continuum, and it's a matter of how many snapshots or
branches to encode, and which ones. And of course, *who* gets to make
that decision. It's something to be approached with some care, but
perhaps it's smarter *not* to approach it with care, since a careful,
detailed study involving more than one single decision-maker is almost
certain to produce nearly endless debate and no decisions!
I think there probably should be more than one branch, and I can
certainly see no easy way to agree on how many or which. Take some
relatively respected tree and find important-looking nodes? I know I
have my own idiosyncratic feelings about "this and this are the same
script, these two aren't," but I probably couldn't prove them.
~mark
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 28 2004 - 23:24:28 EDT