Alphabet, Abjad and so forth

[James A. Landau]

In a message dated Thu, 14 Mar 2002  1:19:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, Scott Sadowsky <lists at SPANISHTRANSLATOR.ORG> writes:

> On 3/14/2002 13:50, James A. Landau wrote the following:
>
>
> >Set up the Latin alphabet in the following tableau
> >
> >       A      B       C          D
> >       E      F       G          -  H
> >       I              K             L,M,N
> >       O      P       Q  R   S   T
> >       U      V       X  Y   Z
> >
> >and you will see that (ignoring the vowels in the first column) the first
> >row is voiced stops...
>
> What language is this alphabet supposed to be used with in order for
> statements made about the table to be valid?  I was assuming it was Latin,
> but with non-Latin letters like <u>, <y>, <k>, and the absence of <j>, I
> have my doubts.
>
> Also, you say that "the second row is unvoiced fricatives", but unless I'm
> mistaken <h> was silent even in classical Latin (Germanic reinterpretations
> to the contrary).
>
> Finally, you state that "the fifth row is voiced", but as far as I know the
> Latin <x> had the value of [ks] -- both elements being voiceless.

I should have been a little more careful in my description.  It should have read that only the four main columns (those under A, B, C, and D) were being discussed.  The other letters were inserted (a little carelessly) only to show that, except for the C-G inversion, this tableau can be made to work with the Latin alphabet as used in English.

H, whether sounded or not, has no relatives in the Latin alphabet and no matter where it gets placed it is out of sequence.

The fifth row, granted, is pretty ragged and I should have qualified the word "voiced".  Is it scholarly consensus that Latin lacked a /v/ sound?  If so, then the placement of the V in modern latin alphabets is due to its having been split off from U, the last row of the "B" column is blank, and it is purely fortuitous that V ended up where the tableau suggests it belongs.

X is unusual, being the only consonant diphthong in the alphabet.  The /k/ part of X fits neatly into the "C" column (if, of course, you don't put it in the "B" column because consonantal V is missing.)  On the other hand, X lacks any trace of the full-height loop that characterizes every other letter in the "C" column.

The /ks/ diphthong is interesting because it is a hard C followed by a soft C.  Whether that is relevant to anything, I really can't say.  Was X originally used in Latin as a guttural?  And if so, is it classified as voiced, unvoiced, or neither?

I don't know if pairing R and Y makes sense, but if you do so then S and Z pair nicely and lets me claim there is at least one voiced consonant in the last row.

I hope I've answered your questions, whether or not I've answered your objections.

     - Jim Landau