[#29] Working on glyphs and glyph blocks

references.bib

@@ -45,6 +45,20 @@ @book{knorozov1967
   series         = {Russian translation series of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology},
 }
 
+@book{bricker1986,
+  author         = {Bricker, Victoria Reifler},
+  title          = {A Grammar of Mayan Hieroglyphs},
+  publisher      = {Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University},
+  year           = {1986},
+}
+
+@book{macrilooper2003,
+  author         = {Macri, Martha J. and Looper, Matthew G.},
+  title          = {The New Catalog of Maya Hieroglyphs: Volume 1: The Classic Period Inscriptions},
+  publisher      = {University of Oklahoma Press},
+  year           = {2003},
+}
+
 @book{crystal2010,
   author         = {Crystal, David},
   title          = {The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language},

terminology/terminology.tex

@@ -4,15 +4,15 @@
 \chapter{Terminology}
 
 \section{Grapheme}
-\textcquote[p.204]{crystal2010}{Graphemes are the smallest units in a writing system capable of 
+\textcquote[204]{crystal2010}{Graphemes are the smallest units in a writing system capable of 
 causing a contrast in meaning.}
 In linguistics, graphemes are often placed into angle brackets, e.g. \grapheme{a} or \grapheme{b}.
 Sometimes \emph{graphemes} are called \emph{signs}.
 The term \emph{sign} and \emph{grapheme} are considered to be equivalent and 
 interchangeable throughout this work.
 
 \section{Allograph}
-\textcquote[p.204]{crystal2010}{Graphemes are abstract units which may adopt a variety of forms 
+\textcquote[204]{crystal2010}{Graphemes are abstract units which may adopt a variety of forms 
 \elide Each of these possible forms is known as \emph{graphs}\elide
 There is a vast amount of physical variation in the shapes of graphs that does not affect the 
 underlying identity of the grapheme\elide 
@@ -26,6 +26,43 @@ \section{Allograph}
     \label{fig:terminology-grapheme-u-allographs}
 \end{center}
 
+\section{Glyph and glyph block}
+The term \emph{Hieroglyph} or \emph{glyph} is not an exact term.
+In epigraphic literature, a \emph{glyph} is considered to be a group of one or more graphemes.
+They can represent a syllable, single words or even a whole phrase 
+(\cite[1]{bricker1986}, (\cite[23]{macrilooper2003})).
+\emph{Glyphs} are usually arranged in regular rectangular shapes called a \emph{glyph block}.
+\textcquote[23]{macrilooper2003}{The rectangular shape of \emph{glyph blocks} results from 
+the arrangement of texts into rows and columns}.
+
+\section{Analysis of an unknown writing system}
+In distinguishing distinctive signs and their allographs, prior to linguistic decipherment, 
+researchers followed the assumption that graphemes of a script are considered the same if 
+they resemble each other in more features than either resembles any other.
+The convenient way to do this is the segmentation of texts into characters and the subsequent 
+verification by means of distribution analyses, which establishes the distribution and 
+connection among one another and confirms identification. 
+If there is no linguistic content control (character interpretation), 
+however, there is the uncertainty that graphemes and 
+their allographs are not recognized in writing systems rich in variants and erroneously 
+inventoried as distinctive characters with their own number key.
+
+
+Yuri Knorozov states that, \textcquote[34]{knorozov1967}{Two [signs] are identical when 
+they are both composed of the same graphic elements\elide, whose drawing and disposition is
+sufficiently similar to allow them to be identified.}
+
+
+
+Identifying graphemes in an unknown writing system can be challenging.
+
+
+
+
+Eric Thompson (\cite[12\psq]{thompson1962catalog}) also recognized the method as a source of 
+potential false conclusions.
+
+
 Tikal Temple IV, Lintel 2 A7