Re: Revised Phoenician proposal

From: James Kass (
Date: Tue Jun 08 2004 - 08:23:55 CDT

  • Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: Revised Phoenician proposal"

    D. Starner wrote,

    > There's a big difference between Phoenician not being a separate script
    > from those already encoded in Unicode, and it not existing. It certainly
    > exists as a script variant, like Fraktur.
    > In that sense, treating Phoenician as a script variant of Hebrew is a big
    > win for many of the users of the script, since they would have a hard time
    > deciphering the bizarre (to them) script variant but have no problem reading
    > texts originally written in it in different fonts.

    Suppose that the following two sentences are true:

    1) Scholars of Semitic *languages* consider Phoenician to be
        a script variant of modern Hebrew.

    2) Scholars of writing systems consider Phoenician to be
        a distinct script from modern Hebrew.

    It is hoped that the UTC will give each viewpoint as much careful
    consideration as it deserves.

    Best regards,

    James Kass

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 08 2004 - 08:25:31 CDT