Re: Phoenician

From: Peter Kirk (
Date: Tue May 11 2004 - 07:36:26 CDT

  • Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Everson-bashing"

    On 10/05/2004 22:22, Doug Ewell wrote:

    >Peter Kirk <peterkirk at qaya dot org> wrote:
    >>And these two cases are hardly a good advertisement for the expert's
    >>reputation. The Coptic/Greek unification proved to be ill-advised and
    >>is being undone. As for the unified W and Q, well, I guess that if the
    >>Kurds and others who use these letters in Cyrillic knew how this
    >>decision would mean that their alphabet will never be sorted correctly
    >>(unless they get round to tailoring their collations), they would make
    >>a strongly argued case for disunification. Well, perhaps the expert
    >>can feel how much his fingers have been burned by over-unification and
    >>so is now pressing for everything to be disunified.
    >I can't believe I am reading this. Far more than anyone else, Michael
    >has *always* supported the disunification of Coptic from Greek and of
    >Kurdish Cyrillic Q and W from their Latin counterparts. They have been
    >two of his signature causes through the years.
    >-Doug Ewell
    > Fullerton, California
    Thanks for the clarification. I don't know the history here, and I had
    misunderstood Peter C and John C's comments, especially John's "If the
    rest of you hadn't agreed with his judgments most of the time, the
    Roadmap might look quite different.", as implying that on such issues
    (and Peter C named only these two) the UTC agreed with Michael's judgment.

    In this case I don't understand Peter C's comment, unless he has made
    the same mistake as me. When he wrote:

    >I think one's track record in making judgments on boundary cases is
    >established only after having successfully dealt with boundary cases --
    >and enough to establish a level of confidence.
    I took him as referring to Michael's track record on these two issues.
    Well, maybe Michael was right and the UTC was wrong on them. But if it
    is the UTC which at first unsuccessfully dealt with these two issues and
    has now had to reconsider one of them, then perhaps it is the UTC which
    has failed to establish a level of confidence.

    Well, at least this makes Michael into a consistent splitter, not
    someone who has changed his mind on this. Of course the danger of
    consistency is that it becomes inflexibility in cases where the
    consistent policy is inappropriate.

    Peter Kirk (personal) (work)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 11 2004 - 23:53:47 CDT