Print

Print


On 28/02/2014 07:41, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets wrote:
[snip]
> Because it's not yours. It hasn't been created by
> English people, it isn't used exclusively to write the
> English language, so there's no reason to call it "the
> English alphabet".

This is all historically correct; then I find Christophe's
stuff generally is pretty sound.

On 04/03/2014 18:02, Padraic Brown wrote:
[snip]
> Who the hell invented the Latin alphabet? The Romans?
> They're thieves! They stole it from the Etruscans who in
> turn nicked it from the Greeks who in turn nam it from
> the Phoenicians who, to be fair, properly inherited from
> the Semites who in turn got it from the Egyptians.

This is sadly incorrect.

The Roman and Etruscan alphabets ultimately _derived_ from
Old italic alphabets, which in turn were derived from
varieties of the western Greek alphabets brought to southern
Italy by settlers from  of Eretria and Chalkis.  There was
no one Greek alphabet at the time.  No one stole any
alphabet from any one else.  Writing spread and was adapted.
  *There was innovation along the way.*

To contrast this so-called "thieving" with Phoenicians
"properly inheriting" their abjad is bizarre, to put it
politely.

The Phoenicians were Semites; where they got their abjad from
is still unclear AFAIK.  It has been speculated that it was
derived from the 'proto-Sinaitic script' known from graffiti
found in the Sinai peninsular.  It has also been speculated
that this script was a "half-way house" between the
Phoenician abjad and Egyptian hieroglyphics.  But this is
all *speculation* only.

It is not known whether the proto-Sinaitic script was an
abjad or even if it was writing at all - tho most do assume
that it was.  But the nature of the script is unknown, nor
is the connexion, if any, with Egyptian writing known.
There is the possibility - heaven forbid - that the
Phoenicians actually did invent their abjad!

But I'm getting a bit disillusioned with the list at the
moment.  I comment that "If it is as a bridge to the
'greater world' where the Roman alphabet is used, then using
"v" as a vowel is not brilliant", and that prompts a whole
batch of emails defending the use of _v_ as a vowel as tho
defending the holy grail itself.  Then exception is taken to
my daring to call it the "Roman alphabet" - finally
prompting this incredible rant.

Sorry - I really have been trying to do some serious
conlanging recently, and this rant demonstrates only too
clearly why I have been corresponding privately over my
present project.

I really have not got time to waste on this thread any
longer.  I joined this list because of an interest in
conlanging; when the list interferes with this, it is, I
think, time to go NOMAIL.

-- 
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"Ein Kopf, der auf seine eigene Kosten denkt,
wird immer Eingriffe in die Sprache thun."
[J.G. Hamann, 1760]
"A mind that thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language".