26-03-2024, 02:07 PM
Thanks for these posts. I'm following these explorations with interest; especially this strategy.
As you note: "it seems also possible that the initial and final glyphs are indicators of an alphabetic sorting, of the kind that Zattera’s paper implies..."
My alternative is a (non-linguistic) text based on two or more paradigms or templates, one of them being [qokeedy] - the B Text - in which case the natural order of the glyphs is their paradigmatic order - which you are construing as alphabetic. I think there are two orders of sorting, the other paradigm being [choldaiin]. Unless it is the other way around - I am construing alphabetic sorting as 'templates'.
As you note: "it seems also possible that the initial and final glyphs are indicators of an alphabetic sorting, of the kind that Zattera’s paper implies..."
My alternative is a (non-linguistic) text based on two or more paradigms or templates, one of them being [qokeedy] - the B Text - in which case the natural order of the glyphs is their paradigmatic order - which you are construing as alphabetic. I think there are two orders of sorting, the other paradigm being [choldaiin]. Unless it is the other way around - I am construing alphabetic sorting as 'templates'.