Re: [hebrew] Re: Ancient Northwest Semitic Script

From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Sat Dec 27 2003 - 13:45:15 EST

  • Next message: Mark E. Shoulson: "Re: Aramaic unification and information retrieval"

    At 13:36 -0500 2003-12-27, John Cowan wrote:
    >Michael Everson scripsit:
    >
    >>I remain convinced, however, that suggestion that Phoenician be
    >>unified with Hebrew and Phoenician is ridiculous in the extreme,
    >>and I will oppose it absolutely. Likewise, it is clear that
    >>Samaritan is also not to be unified with Hebrew.
    >
    >There's clearly a slip here: the second occurrence of "Phoenician" must
    >mean something else, and I can't figure out what. However, it is not
    >so clear to me that Phoenician and palaeo-Hebrew (and a fortiori
    >Samaritan) should not be unified.

    Sorry.

    I remain convinced, however, that suggestion that Phoenician be
    unified with Hebrew is ridiculous in the extreme, and I will oppose
    it absolutely. Likewise, it is clear that Samaritan is also not to be
    unified with Hebrew.

    Currently we do think that Phoenican and Palaeo-Hebrew should be
    unified. Samaritan on the other hand is a later development of that
    line, which had to good fortune of taking on typographic
    regularization and development; it has interesting and unique
    features with regard to vowel representation, and a modern community
    of users; it is best disunified from Phoenician.

    -- 
    Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  * http://www.evertype.com
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Dec 27 2003 - 14:33:58 EST