Re: Archaic-Greek/Palaeo-Hebrew (was, interleaved ordering; was, Phoenician)

From: Dean Snyder (
Date: Thu May 13 2004 - 14:06:06 CDT

  • Next message: Language Analysis Systems, Inc. Unicode list reader: "RE: interleaved ordering (was RE: Phoenician)"

    Michael Everson wrote at 7:01 PM on Thursday, May 13, 2004:

    >There might be time, but there is no reason to make such a proposal.
    >Archaic Greek is already handled by Greek. It even includes archaic
    >letters like QOPPA. There are some letters missing, like HETA, but
    >those can be added in due course.

    No, I mean glyphically-archaic Greek (just as you are focused on
    glyphically-archaic Northwest Semitic).

    If you believe that multi-dialectical Archaic Greek scripts are already
    sufficiently covered in plain text by modern Greek glyphs, with their
    adjuncts, then how in the world can you au contraire propose that multi-
    dialectical Northwest Semitic scripts, sans adjuncts, be de-unified? The
    issues are the same, only the differences are much greater in Greek
    script development. To pick one example, just ask any modern literate
    Greek to read Archaic Greek glyphs; you will get more numerous, and more
    deeply puzzled, responses than Shoulson did with modern literate Israelis
    trying to read Palaeo-Hebrew glyphs.

    This is inconsistency and, frankly, smacks of anti-Hellenism! [ ;-) Just
    kidding, of course, on that last remark.]


    Dean A. Snyder

    Assistant Research Scholar
    Manager, Digital Hammurabi Project
    Computer Science Department
    Whiting School of Engineering
    218C New Engineering Building
    3400 North Charles Street
    Johns Hopkins University
    Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218

    office: 410 516-6850
    cell: 717 817-4897

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 13 2004 - 14:06:21 CDT