14.389, Qs: Grammatica Anglicana, Script Introduction

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-14-389. Fri Feb 7 2003. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 14.389, Qs: Grammatica Anglicana, Script Introduction

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U.<aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry, Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>

Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org):
	Simin Karimi, U. of Arizona
	Terence Langendoen, U. of Arizona

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Renee Galvis <renee at linguistlist.org>
 ==========================================================================

We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually
best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is
then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was
instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we
would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.

In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it
is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have
taken the trouble to respond to the query.

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.

=================================Directory=================================

1)
Date:  Thu, 06 Feb 2003 13:01:07 +0000
From:  Victorina Gonzalez-Diaz <mfcxjvg4 at stud.man.ac.uk>
Subject:  Greaves'  (1594) Grammatica Anglicana

2)
Date:  Fri, 07 Feb 2003 16:02:12 +0000
From:  Peter  Unseth <pete_unseth at gial.edu>
Subject:  introduction of scripts

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

Date:  Thu, 06 Feb 2003 13:01:07 +0000
From:  Victorina Gonzalez-Diaz <mfcxjvg4 at stud.man.ac.uk>
Subject:  Greaves'  (1594) Grammatica Anglicana

Dear linguists

In the introduction to his Grammar (1594), Greaves complains about the
corruption that English undergoes at the time, especially criticising
the improper use that renowned authors make of the vernacular. He
illustrates this incorrect use of English with the following two
sentences:

More better, such works was finished.
He spake it to shee whose fountaines is dried up.

Presumably, these are quotations, though it would also be possible
that Greaves either manipulated them, or even made them up.

My question, then, is the following: Does anyone recognise the
sentences reproduced above as coming from the work of any eModE
writer? If you do, please reply directly to my e-mail address.

Thank you very much.

Subject-Language: English; Code: ENG


-------------------------------- Message 2 -------------------------------

Date:  Fri, 07 Feb 2003 16:02:12 +0000
From:  Peter  Unseth <pete_unseth at gial.edu>
Subject:  introduction of scripts


In studying how writing systems have been introduced to various
languages, I have two questions for which I would appreciate help:

Have there been any cases where one group prevented another from
adopting its script?

What cases are there where an outsider has helped a group develop its
own unique script? I know of only Cyrillic (St. Cyril and Methodius),
Cree (Evans), Miao (Pollard), Komi (St. Nicholas of Perm), and
possibly Micmac.

Thanks! I will post a summary if responses warrant it.

Pete Unseth
Graduate Institute of Applied Linguistics

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-14-389