From eee13c7a2d0afba87b8ba7a0b36a9165c0429cfc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Bauer <75776786+yax-lakam-tuun@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 21:27:00 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] [#29] Writing limitations --- references.bib | 11 +++++++++++ terminology/terminology.tex | 30 +++++++++++++++++------------- 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/references.bib b/references.bib index 32fb766..82dc27f 100644 --- a/references.bib +++ b/references.bib @@ -52,6 +52,17 @@ @book{thompson1962 year = {1962} } +@inbook{kelley1962, + author = {Kelley, David H.}, + chapter = {Reviewed Work: A Catalog of Maya Hieroglyphs by J. Eric S. Thompson}, + pages = {436-438}, + title = {American Journal of Archaeology}, + year = {1962}, + volume = {66}, + number = {4}, + doi = {https://doi.org/10.2307/502055}, +} + @book{knorozov1967, author = {Knorozov, Yuri}, title = {Selected chapters from the writing of the Maya Indians (1965)}, diff --git a/terminology/terminology.tex b/terminology/terminology.tex index 3d96424..5bcff53 100644 --- a/terminology/terminology.tex +++ b/terminology/terminology.tex @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ \section{Cataloging of signs} conjunction with the number. So, for example, all Thompson numbers are labeled with ``T'', e.g. \thompson{510}. -In 2003, Martha J. Macri and Matthew G. Looper proposed a new system which assigns all grapheme +In 2003, Martha J. Macri and Matthew G. Looper proposed a new system which assigns all graphemes a code consisting of three digits (\cite[21,25]{macrilooper2003}). The first two digits specifies the category of the sign (e.g. A for animals, M for signs with hands etc.) whereas the third digit is an arbitrary number @@ -98,26 +98,30 @@ \section{Cataloging of signs} \subsection{Problems and limitations} - - -researchers followed the assumption that graphemes of a script are considered the same if +Having all these sign catalogs are huge help to systematically analyze the Maya writing system. +Identifying graphemes are crucial to decipher the meaning of the signs. +One way to do this, is by segmentation of the texts into distinct graphemes. +Researchers hereby 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. \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.} -One way to do this is the segmentation of texts into distinct graphemes. -Further distribution analyzes confirms the connection and identification. +However, if there is no control in terms of linguistics and content, +identifying graphemes can be challenging and even be problematic. + +Especially in writing systems with many allographs like the Maya hieroglyphs, +allographs are sometimes not recognized and, instead, are interpreted as separate graphemes. +Another problem is that some signs are considered to be separate graphemes, +but, as later progress in decipherment has shown, were actually allographs. +Eric Thompson (\cite[12\psq]{thompson1962catalog}) also recognized the method of segmentation as +a potential source of false conclusions. +David H. Kelley (\cite{kelley1962}) showed in his review of Thompson's sign catalog that +some T-numbers represent more than one grapheme (e.g. TODO) and some +T-numbers are allographs of another (e.g. TODO). -However, if there is no control in terms linguistics and content, -identifying graphemes in an unknown writing system can be challenging. -Eric Thompson (\cite[12\psq]{thompson1962catalog}) recognized the method as a source of -potential false conclusions. -Especially in writing systems with many allographs like the Maya hieroglyphs, -allographs are not recognized and interpreted as separate graphemes. -Another problem is that some graphemes PAS example for over-splitting (Tikal Temple IV, Lintel 2 A7)