Re: why Aramaic now

From: Elaine Keown (elaine_keown@yahoo.com)
Date: Thu Dec 25 2003 - 16:46:24 EST

  • Next message: Mark E. Shoulson: "Re: why Aramaic now"

          Elaine Keown

    Dear Mark and List:

    > >Some of the sets of symbols I found--- snip
    > > --are innately controversial because of the
    > Roadmap.

    Examples of innately controversial for Mark:
    I think Hebrew's been written since 1,150 B.C. But at
    every stage it had different punctuation, at some
    stages there were various numbers, etc.

    So I divided "Extended Hebrew"--which I now think has
    about 300 items--into meaningful subsets. The
    "epigraphy subset"--about 30 items, including the
    symbols for "zuz" and "shekel" which I emailed you
    once--is delegated by the Roadmap to a potential other
    script.

    Similarly, the "Samaritan subset"--about 20 items--is
    supposedly to become part of a different subsets
    according to the Roadmap.

    Elaine

    __________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
    http://photos.yahoo.com/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Dec 25 2003 - 17:37:31 EST