Re: Coptic/Greek (Re: Phoenician)

From: Patrick Andries (Patrick.Andries@xcential.com)
Date: Wed May 12 2004 - 05:14:10 CDT

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: TR35"

    D. Starner a écrit :

    >"Doug Ewell" <dewell@adelphia.net> writes:
    >
    >
    >
    >>Peter Kirk <peterkirk at qaya dot org> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>Because each such case has to be judged on its individual merits,
    >>>according to proper justification and user requirements. There can be
    >>>no hard rules like "always split" or "always join".
    >>>
    >>>
    >>Nobody, neither Michael nor anyone else, ever advocates such a rule.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >But that's what Patrick implied when he asked how you support the Hebrew/Phoencian
    >unification and the Coptic/Greek unification, that such a rule exists.
    >
    >
    Well, yes. But more specifically why was the unification ill-advised for
    Peter Kirk in the case of Coptic and would not be in the case of
    Phoenician. Unless, of course, one justs follows the trend and says
    Coptic unification was ill-avised because it has been disunified.
    Somehow, I feel I should not have asked since the argument often seems
    to be, in the case of neighbouring historical scripts, genealogy and
    user community feeling (as interpreted by the proposers).

    P. A.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 12 2004 - 05:15:08 CDT