Peter Constable wrote: > the Old Latin doesn't have the accents, but if you > used the 23 > uni-cameral characters for Vietnamese text, then surely a Vietnamese > speaker would recognize it as caseless Vietnamese with the accents > stripped off. > >... > So, while Michael's argument was flawed in the way he expressed it, I > think your counter-argument also is flawed.
Hmmm, I'm not sure it's flawed. Sure, recognizability makes it non-equivalent to the Phoenician-Hebrew case, but it still demonstrates that a subset-superset relationship between purported scripts A and B does not make them distinct. Recognizability is a much better argument, IMHO, but then there's Sütterlin... And cyphers, as you mention in another message. -- François
