Featural alphabets?

[Kathy H.]

Dan P. asked, "[C]an a featural writing system somehow be reduced to an alphabet?"
 

The answer is Yes.  An alphabet denotes consonants and vowels.  Since the Korean writing system separately captures consonants and vowels, it is an alphabet.  
 
An abjad only denotes consonants.  SW would not be an abjad.
 
An abugida considers that one particular vowel automatically occurs with the consonants while all the other vowels are indicated with diacritics.  (Think of it this way:  If there is no vowel diacritic, then the default vowel occurs.)  SW would not be an abugida.  
 
An alphasyllabary shows its vowels through symbols that do not necessarily occur in linear order with the consonants that matches the spoken language.  Thus, consonant-vowel or vowel-consonant forms a syllabic unit, with the sounds represented with separate symbols, but the order of the symbols does not need to match the order of the pronunciation.  In an alphasyllabary, a CV sequence in pronunciation could be written in the syllable as VC.  (I would assume that such a language requires CV syllables and disallows VC syllables.)
 
Could Korean be an alphasyllabary?  On the one hand, the order within the syllabic block follows the order of pronunciation.  On the other hand, the order within the block can vary slightly, depending on the symbols for that syllable.  However, the order is "rule governed" and there is not a reversal of C's and V's between the written and spoken forms, so I would say that Korean Hangul would not be an alphasyllabary.  (A syllable such as [ni] would not be written as <in>.)  
 
In a syllabary, the symbol represents the whole syllable (or possibly a mora).  The sounds in the syllable are not captured with separate symbols.  SW is clearly not a syllabary.  
 
Can a featural system be an alphabet?  The content of the written symbol needs to be distinguished from the form of the symbol.  Writing systems can be analyzed according to what information is captured by the system (semantics, sounds, morphology) and how the symbols are arranged (linearly, diacritics, syllabic blocks, etc.) and what the symbols look like.  Featural systems have the symbols "looking like" the features of the articulations.  This identifies Korean Hangul and SW as featural systems.
 
The next question is:  What information does SW capture ni (oops, I mean "in"!) its symbols.  Semantics?  No.  Sounds/Gestures?  Yes, somewhat.  Morphology?  Not sure.   
 
I say "somewhat" for the gestures because the symbols capture bits of articulation rather than the articulation as a unit.  In English, the letter <k> represents holistically the back of the tongue contacting the velum while the vocal folds are held open.  There are not separate symbols for the back of the tongue, the velum, contact, and the state of the glottis.  SW captures that level of detail, so the symbols do not represent the gesture as a unit.  
 
Another question is, How are the symbols arranged?  SW seems to have syllabic blocks. 
 
Is SW an alphabet?  Well, does it capture the sign language equivalent of consonants and vowels in the way that alphabets do?
 
Kathy
 
_________________________________________________________________
Explore the seven wonders of the world
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=7+wonders+world&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/slling-l/attachments/20070927/8dddd094/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
SLLING-L mailing list
SLLING-L at majordomo.valenciacc.edu
http://majordomo.valenciacc.edu/mailman/listinfo/slling-l