On Sat, 9 Mar 2002, Valerie Sutton wrote:
> I guess "real" to them means "established" or "something that looks
> exactly like the Roman alphabet"...
That's a funny one too. Newkirk notation uses the Roman alphabet,
and no one seems too interested in it. Apparently the SignFont committee
rejected that aspect of it, because they wanted something a bit different
from the Roman alphabet!
My understanding is that these are common reactions to almost any
proposed alphabet: one group thinks it should look just like the Roman
alphabet, and the other thinks it should be somewhat different, to reflect
the difference in cultures.
-Angus B. Grieve-Smith
Linguistics Department
University of New Mexico
|
SignWriting List Forum