the study of wrinting (prólogo libro de gelb)

7/29/2019 The Study of Wrinting (prlogo libro de Gelb)

1/8

T H E S T UD Y O F W R I T I N G *)A n A c c o u n t o / " A S t u d y o/ W r i ti n g " b y I . J . G elb .

The t e rm ' g r ammato logy ' in the sub t i t l e o f th i s book i s a co inagewhich the au thor sugges t s f o r ' t he s tudy o f the sc ience o f wr i t ing '(249) . A l though he ind ica te s tha t th i s book i s on ly a p r e l im ina ryou t l ine o f the sub jec t ma t t e r and me thods o f such a sc ience , Ge lb ha sga the red a cons ide rab le amount o f ma te r i a l and has deve loped an u m b e r o f r e v o l u t i o n a r y t h e o r i e s c o n c e r n i n g m a n y o f t h e w r i t i n gsys tem s of the anc ien t N ea r Eas t . He b r ings to th i s sub jec t h i s com pe-tence no t on ly a s a spec ia l i s t i n Sumero-Akkad ian cune i fo rm andSem it ics , b ut a lso as one of the leading con t r ibu tors to the de-c iphe rment o f Hie rog lyph ic Hi t t i t e , i n t ima tc ly invo lved in theprob lems o f the Indo-European l anguages o f Ana to l i a .

A number o f r ecen t s tud ie s o f wr i t ing na tu ra l ly come to mind ind i scuss ing G e lb 's book ; a t f i r s t g lance one migh t exp ec t the i r co n ten t sto be s imi la r . Bu t the purpose and con ten t o f Ge lb ' s book a r e com-ple te ly d i f fe rent . D. Dir ing er ' s The Alphab~'z~ and C. Fossey ' s L escaract~res dtranger s cons is t ch ie f ly of tab les aI~d cha r ts prese nt ing m an yof the wor ld ' s wr i t ing sys tems . H . Jensen ' s Die Schri[t g i v e s m o r edesc r ip t ive in fo rma t ion conce rn ing pa r t i cu la r types o f wr i t ing sys tem s .S imi la r ly , G. R . Dr iver ' s Semi t ic Wri t ing (mis t i t led , s ince it d ea ls w i thx~on-Semit ic wr i t ing as wel l ) conta ins exhaus t ive mate r ia ls on thecune i fo rm , rod Wes t Semi t i c wr i t ing sys tems , wi th cons ide rab ledocumenta t ion in the anc ien t source s fo r the na t ive t e rmino log ie s andtechn iques o f wr i t ing . Ge lb ' s book , on the o the r h and , p r e sen t s fo r thef i r s t t ime a typo log ica l s t r uc tu ra l ana lys i s o f wr i t ing and wr i t ingsys tems , wi thou t the ana lys i s o f ex te rna l f o rm so f ami l i a r f rom theusua l s tud ie s . I n th i s s t r uc tu ra l r e a lm , Ge lb ha s succeeded in l ay ing tor e s t c e r t a in we l l e s t abEshed myths conce rn ing the wr i t ing sys tems o ft h e a n c i e n t N , m r E a s t , a n d h a s t h r o w n a co m p l e t el y n ew l ig h t o n t h e s ea n d o t h e r w r i t i n g s y s t e m s .Chap te r 1 , 'Wr i t ing a s a sys tem of s igns ' , t r e a t s the fo l lowing

*) A S tudy o f Wr i t i ng : t he founda t ions o f g rammato logy . By I . J . Ge lb .Pp. xv, 295. Chicago: Universi ty of Chicago Press , i952.


2/8

90

subjects" ways of communicating ideas, definit ion of writ ing, sourcesof information, the study of writing. Gelb defines wr it in g as 'a s ys te mof human intercommunication by means o~ con ven t iona l vis iblema rks' (i 2); he defends the l inguist 's posit ion th at w rit in g is bas icallya representation of speech. It is disappointing, ho we ver, th a t at thislate date he finds it necessary to characterize his linguist as a be-haviorist . This merely revives the earlier Iogomachy on the subjectof the Am erican l inguist's behaviorism instead of ac ting on Blo om -field's dictum that the l inguist needs no sanction from any school ofpsychology. Indeed, G elb himself has exten ded the l ing uis t 's in-sistence on formal structural study to the field of writ ing withoutregard to the twilight zones in which writ ing m ay no t be a p oin t-for -point representation of speech. Without regard for the p~ychologicalexplanations that have been offered for this or th at de ve lop m en t of awrit ing system, Gelb analyzes writ ing in term s of th e for m al an d theknowable.Chapter 2, 'Forerunners of ~Titing', discusses primitive drawings,the descriptive-representational device, the id en tify in g- m ne m on icdevice, and various limited systems that fall short of full phoneticrepresentation on the logographic, the syllabic, o r the alp hab eticlevel. As forerunners of writing Gelb identifies th os e co m m u ni ca tio nsystems in wh ich the fu ll realization of th e princip le of ph on etictransfer from symbol to sound had not y et by a ach ieved. He re belongthe wel l known American Indian drawings which could be inte rpr etedindependently of any particular language. Among limited systems,Gelb includes particularly the Aztec and the M ayan. In general , hedistinguishes between representational forms in which the artistic orpictorial elements are paramount and those in which the con cept ofphonetic transfer is the dominant principle.

Chapter 3, 'Word-syllabic systems', begins the discussion of 'fullsystems of writing'. G elb introduces the sub ject b y l:isting the seventypes of writing according to which he classifies the ,systems of theworld in their earliest or logosyllabic stage. His structural frameworkconsists of three main categories" l o g o g r a p h i c , whe: re each sym bolstands for a word of the language; s y l l a b i c , where each symbol repre -sents a w hole syllable and sometimes even bisy llabic gr ou ps ; an da l p h a b e t i c , wh ere each symbol represents a c on so na nt or a vowel.Since no pure logographic system exists anywhere, Gelb sets up an


3/8

91

i n t e r m e d i a t e s t a g e c a l l e d logo-sy l labic . T h i s c a t e g o r y a c c o m m o d a t e sf o u r o f t h e s e v e n s y s t e m s m e n t i o n e d a b o v e , v i z . S u m e r i a n , E g y p t i a n ,H i t t i te (i.e . Hie rogl~lphic H i t t i t e , s ince cun e i form H i t t i te fa l ls w i th inthe Sm ae r ian typ e ) , Ch inese, C re tan , P ro to -E la m i te , and P ro to - In d ic .T h e o t a e r s t a g e s a r e i n r e a l i t y n o m o r e p u r e t h a n t h e l o g o g r a p h i c .Alp habe t i c sys tem s , f o r exam ple , r e t a in ve s t ige s ot' e i the r logqg raph icor sy l labic s tages or both . Never the!ess , in the bas ic ty l~ologica lsequence l ogograph ic > sy l lab ic > a lphabe t i c (a lread y indica , ed b yBloomf ie ld ) , Ge lb ha s a f r amework in to which any sys tem of wr i t ingc a n b e s t r u c t u r a l l y f i t t e d .

So f a r , t he r ev iewer ha s purpose ly ignored the ex te rna l cha rac -t e r i s t i c s o f wr i t ing sys tems . I t i s Ge lb ' s the s i s tha t cons ide ra t ions o fex te rna l f o rm a re mean ingfu l on ly to the ep ig raphe r o r pa leographe r ,n o t t o t h e ' g r a m m a t o l o g i s t ' . W h a t i s i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e l a t t e r i s t h einne r fo rm and p r inc ip le unde r ly ing a pa r t i cu la r wr i t ing sys tem, no ti t s ou te r ge s ta l t . W i th th~s in mind , one can app rec ia te the d i l em m ain to which one i s cus tom~r i !y p laced by l abe l l ing the Old Pe r s i an o rU g a r i t i c s y s t e m ' c u n e i f o m a ' - a . . d l e t t ing i t go a t tha t , me re ly becausethe wedge i s the component e lement of the s~a 'nbol . The absurd resul t so f th i s t e rmino log ica l confus ion a r e found in a l l t he handbooks whichwres t l e wi th compar i sons be tween Uga r i t i c o r Old Pe r s i an andAkkad ian s igns . Unde r s t and ing o f the s t ruc tu re immedia te ly d i f f e r -en t i a t e s the U ga r i t i c f rom the Old Pe r s ian and t~o th f rom the Sum ero-A k k a d i a n t y p e .

I n genera l , i t seems bes t to se t up th e typ ologica l sequence as fo llows:l ogograph ic > logo- sy l lab ic > sy l lab ic > sy l lab ic -a lphabe t i c > a lphabe t i c .Th is scheme acco tmts fo r those . sys tems , such a s Old Pe r s i an and W es tSemit ic sc r ip t io p lena , which Ge!b ca l l s 'Or ienta l fore runners to fu l la l p h a b e t i z a t i o n ' , a n d t h u s g i v e s a d e q u a t e e m p h a s i s t o t h e i n t e r -m e d i a t e m i x e d s t a g e s .

P e r h a p s t h e s i n g l e m o s t i m p o r t a n t r e v o l u t i o n a r y c o n c e p t i n t h i sbook is Ge lb ' s a s s ignm ent o f the W es t Semi ti c sys tem s to the sy l l ab ics t age . O the r s have p r eceded Ge lb in a l lud ing to the sy l l ab ic cha rac te ro f the Wes t Semi t i c sys tems ; Ge lb names F . P r ae to r ius , S . Ye iv in , E .Schwyze r , A . Poebe l , and H. Pede r sen , wi th E . H . S tu r t evan t andBloom fie ld to , be inc luded a lso . Bu t i t is to Gelb a lone tha t we now owethe fu l l p roof o f the sy l l ab ic cha rac te r o f Wes t Semi t i c wr i t ing . Ve rybr ie f ly h i s a rgument may be summed up a s fo l lows . ( 1 ) S ince the


4/8

92

alphabe t as such was developed by the G reeks out of mater i~l b orro w edfrom W est Semitic: sources , what exis ted pr ior to th is a lp ha be t icinvent ion mus t have been a s tage of ~ i t ing o ther than a lphabet ic .(2) The syllabic character of the West Semitic systems is to be under-s tood as the W pe where each symbol s tands for a con son an t plus a n yvowel or zero. The. proof for the inherent vowel w i thin each W estSemitic sign is to be found in the systems of vocalic indication de-ve!oped in later t imes, when a dist inct sym bol was in ve nt ed to ind ica tethe absence of vowel : if the b asic s ign h ad been m ere ly con son anta l ,no such separate s ign wou ld have been needed. F ur the rm or e, th is i strue not only of Hebrew with its shwa and Arabic wi th i t s s u k r n , b u t(what is more important) of the systems derived from the W es t Sem itic,such a~ the Ethiopic and the Indic. In bo th of these, th e b a si c signsubsumes a vowel (short a), and special signs were in ve nt ed bo th toexpress other vow el quali ties and qu anti t ies an d to ex pre ss abse nceof a vo wel. Note also that the names of the Arabic le t te n ~, so far asth ey do no t go back to earlier names (such as ali / , mira, nun~. , are of theC a type (ha, ta, tha , etc.). This thesis, the h igh poinl of Ge l:s vo lum e,i llustrates the value of the structural app roach in the st u d y of wr it ing.Perhap s the nonsense about West Semitic syllaba ries bein g con -sonantal because ' in the Semit ic languages only the co nso na nts areimp ortan t ' w il l now finally be abandoned .In the c hapter on logosyllabic systems, G elb discu sses ea ch of th eseven i~asic systems and the underlying principles of ea ch . F o r th ethree still undeciphered (Proto-Elamite, Proto-Indic, and Cretan), hepresents a convenient summary of wh at has been done an d w ha t s t i llremains to be done. There is a lso an im po rtant co ntr i bu t ion in them aterial (fig. 57) illustrating the essentially une qu ivo ca l sy lla ba rie s o fthe various Assyr~.Babylonian dialects. The bugaboo of polyphonyand hom ophony for Sumero-Akkadian cune iform is acc ur ate lyexploded in favor of the view that every period and tex t-g en re h ad i tsown syl labary in which polyphony and hom oph ony w ere m inima l . Inthe present state of things, as G elb so [~ inte dly ad vo ca te s (110), abasic need in this field is the com pilat ion of individua l p erio d an d are a(= dialect) syllabaries.

Chapter 4, 'Syllabic writings', deals briefly with the cuneiformsyUabaries such as Elamite, cuneiform H itt i te, U rar tea n, L uw ian , an dPalaic. Then in the discussion of the W est S em itic syllab aries, th er e


5/8

93fo l low: t h e u n f o l d i n g o f t h e a r g u m e n t f o r t h e s y l la b i c n a t u r e o f t h e s ewri t inl~s discussed above.

C h a p t e r 5 , ' T h e a l p h a b e t ' , b e g i n s w i t h t h e ' O r i e n t a l f o r e r u n n e r s ' t ot h e a l p h a b e t a n d c o n t i n u e s o n t o t h e f ir st e x a m p l e o f a tr u e a l p h a b e t ,t h e G r e e k. G e l b h e re s u g g e st s t h a t t h e t y p o l o g i c a l s e q u e n c e g i v e ne a r l i e r r e p r e s e n t s a u n i d i r e c t i o n a l t r e n d o f d e v e l o p m e n t . I t i s w o r t hq u o t i n g t h e p a r a g r a p h i n w h i c h h e p o i n ts t h i s o u t . " W h a t t h i s p ri n c ip l e( i . e . un id i r ec t i ona l deve lopmen t ) means i n t he h i s t o ry o f wr i t i ng i st h a t i n r e a c h i n g i t s u l t i m a t e d e v e l o p m e n t , w r i t i n g , w h a t e v e r i t s f o r e -r u n n e r s m a y b e , m u s t p a s s t h r o u g h t h e s t a g e s o f l o g o g r a p h y , s y l l a b o -g r a p h y , a n d a l p h a b e t o g r a p h y i n t h i s , a n d n o o t h e r , o r d e r . T h e r e f o r e ,no wr i t i ng can s t a r t w i th a s y l l ab i c o r a l phabe t i c s t age un l e s s i t i sh n r r n w p c l , d i r p r - f ly n r. . . .n d i r o e t l v j , f r o m z c v c to m j w h i c h h a t o~rnn9 t hr on ~ rh oa l l t h e p r e v i o u s s t a g e s . A s y s t e m o f w r i t i n g c a n n a t u r a l l y s t o p a t o n es t a g e w i t h o u t d e v e l o p i n g f a r t h e r . T h u s , a n u m b e r o f ~ T i t i n g s s t o p p e da t t he l ogograph i c o r : s y l l ab i c s t age . The s ay ing ' na tu ra non f ac i tsa l tu s ' can be app l ied to the h i s tor y of x~a-itings in the sense t h a t nos t age o f deve lopmen t c an be s k ipped . The re fo re , i f i t i s a ccep t ed t ha tl ogography deve lops f i r s t i n to s y l l abography , t hen t he s o -ca l l edE g y p t i a n ' a l p h a b e t ' , w h i c h i s d e v e l o p e d f r o m l o g o g r a p h y , c a n n o t b ean a lphabe t bu t mus t be a s y l l aba ry . The re i s ~o r eve r s e deve lopmen t "an a lphabe t c anno t deve lop i n to a s y l l aba ry , j u s t a s a s y l l aba rycanno t l e ad t o t he c r ea t i on o f l ogography . F or t h i s r e a s on i t i s abs u rdt o s peak o f t he deve lopmen t o f t he E th iop i c (o r S ans kr i t ) s y l l aba r i e sf r o m a S e m i t ic a l p h a b e t . A s s h o w n i n a n o t h e r p l a c e , b o t h t h e E t h i o p i ca n d S a n s k r i t w r i t i n g s a r e f u r t h e r d e v e l o p m e o t s f r o m a S e m i t i c s y l l a -ba ry , wh ich i n t u rn , i s a c r ea t i on fo l l owing t he mode l o f t he Egyp t i ans y l l aba ry" (201) . The p roof o f t h i s un id i r ec t i ona l t r end o f deve lopmen tl i e s i n t he obs e rva t i on t ha t t he re a r e no obs e rved example s o f r eve r s edor sk ipped s t : ages of deve lopment .

C h a p t e r 6 , ' E v o l u t i o n o f w r i t in g ' , p r e s e n ts a s u m m a t i o n o f t h es ys t ems o f wr i t i ng d i s cus s ed ea r l i e r i n t he book i n an a t t e r ap t t oc l a s s i fy t he va r i ous ~ ,T i t i ng s ys t ems o f t he wor ld and fo re runne r s o fw r i t in g w i t h in t h e s t r u c t u r a l f r am e w o r k a l re a d y m e n t io n e d . H o w e v e r ,i t wou ld s eem p re fe rab l e t o r eve r s e t he o rde r o f t he two bas i c p remi s e ss ugges t ed fo r t he ana lys i s o f wr i t i ng s ys t ems and by s uch a r eve r s a l t oi n d i c a t e t h a t t h e h y p o t h e s i s o f u n i d i r e c t io n a l d e v e l o p m e n t a n d t h es t r u c t u r a l f r a m e w o r k o f w r i t i n g s y s t e m s r e s u l t f r o m t h e o b s e r v a t i o n o f


6/8

94

var ious systems and their under lying pr inciples . Thus, by observingthat "From the his tor ical point of v iew the development is f rom theEgypt ian th rough the Wes t Semi t ic wr i t ing to the Greek ~ t ing"(given as premise If , p. 205) and by st ud y of the inn er prin ciple s ofother wr i t ing systems and their developments , i t may be s tated that"F ro m the point of view of the ~heory of writ ing th e ev olu tion is froma word-syllabic through a syllabic writ ing to an alphabetic writ ing"(given as premise I, p. 205).

Chapter 7 , 'Modem wri t ings among pr imit ives ' , br ief ly presentssome information on such writ ing systems as Cherokee, Cree, Micmac,A!a~k~ Eskimo, and Vai and Ba m um in Africa. One o~ th e con-cluding observat ions that "Judging by the great major i ty of wr i t ingsdiscussed in this chapter , the syllabic stage is best su ited for u se a m on gprim'f ive societies" (211) is hardly justif ied considering the paucity ofinformation given about them and in view of the the su cc e~ ach ieve din ma ny par ts o i the wor ld in making 'pr imit ives ' l i te rate in pho nem icorthographies. I t is in this a~rea tha t the wea kest ar gu m en ts in thisbook ~re to be found. The continual com parison s be tw ee n ' " " ,p r imi t ivesocieties and psychology with the psychology of children is not asound procedure from the anthropological (or psychological) point ofview. There : i s really no reason to suspect that the child in 20thcentury European-American society recapitulates in his own develop-m ent the experiences of ' " " " 'pnm~hve societies. Nor is there any reasonto assume a simplicity of structure and organiz ation in t he W,ycho logyof either the child or the 'pr imitive' . Anth ropolog ical an d psy ch o-analyt ical l i terature have long demonstrated that adul t observershave assumed simplicity and naivet~ as convenient explanatiStts formuch more complex systems than could have been suspected. Theinteresting experiments of H. Bauer and J. de Groot which Gelbdescribes (144) where children of school-age were instructed ' to inventalphabets prove chief ly that external similar i ty or even identity ofsymbols does not prove relationship of writing systlems. In both tilesecases, the resultant inventions contained many signs which showedstr ikingly fortuitous similar i ty to West Semitic, Cretan, and Cyprioteforms. However, the use of children in these experiments is a whollysecondary and incidental mat ter . Would an adul t under the samecircumstances have come to much different results ? This rev iew er tr ie djust such an exper iment with an adul t and the resul t was much the


7/8

95s a m e a s r e p o r t e d b y B a u e r a n d d e G r o o t . G e l b ' s e s s e n t i a l p o i n t i st h e r e f o r e t o b e r e i t e r a t e d . " ] ' h e w h o l e q u e s t i o n o f t h e f o r m a l a s p e c to f t h e P r o t o - S e m i t i c a n d S e m i t i c w r i t in g s is o f s e c o n d a r y i m p o r t a n c e ' i nc o m p a r i s o n w i t h t h a t o f t h e o r i g i n o f t h e i n n e r s t r u c t u r e o f t h e s ewr i t i ngs . D i f f e r en t a s t he s e ' va r i ous wr i t i ngs appea r i n ou t e r fo rm,t h e y a r e al l i d e n t i c a l i n t h e i r m o s t i m p o r t a n t i n n e r s t r u c t u r a l c h a r a c -te r i s t i c" th ey a l l oons i s t o f a l im i ted nu m be r of s igns (22 30) eac h ofw h i c h e x p r e s s e s t h e e x a c t c o n s o n a n t , b u t d o e s n o t i n d i c a t e a v o w e l "( 1 4 6 - 7 ) .

Ano the r c r i t i c i s m tha t s eems j us t i f i ed i s t he us e o f t he t e rm ' p r imi -t i v e l a n g u a g e s ' w h e r e t h e a u t h o r c l e a r l y i n t e n d s ' l a n g u a g e s o f p r i m i -

P ot i ve s ' o r r a t h e r ' l anguage s o f p re - l i t e r a t e . oc l e tl e s In con s ide ra t i on o ft h e v a s t , u , , , , , ' ~ o f l in g u i st ic m i s in f o r m a t i o n a b r o a d i n t h e w o r l d , itbehooves one t o t ake s pec i a l c a re w i th s uch t e rms , e i t he r e l imina t i ngt h e m a l t o g e t h e r o r e l s e a v o i d i n g e q u i v o c a t i o n i n t h e i r u s e .

C hap t e r 8 pos e s t he i n t e r e s t i ng and s t i l l ba f f l i ng ques t i on o f 'mono-genesi s o r po lygenes is o f wr i t i ng ' . A l though Ge lb le aves t he q ues t i o n Na s h e m u s t - - u n a n s w e r e d , o n e h a s t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t h e i n c l i n e stoward t he pos s ib i l i t y o f monogenes i s a t l e a s t fo r t he O ld Wor ld .I n d e e d , o n l y r e c e n t l y a s h o r t n o t e i n a b i b l i o g r a p h y d e v o t e d t ocune i fo rm s tud i e s ~) quo t e s an a r ti c le b y R . yon He ine -G e lde rn ,C h i n a , d i e o s t k a s p i s c h e K , ui t, ur u n d d i e H e r k u . n / t / " S c h r i / t , P a i d eu m a 4(B a m berg 1950) 82 a s fo ll ows " " . . . . es e rg ib t s i ch mi t hohe r wahr -s che in l i chke i t , da s s a l l e a l twe l t l i chen S chr i f t en l e t z t en Endes yone i n e r k l e i n a s i a t i s c h e n S c h r i f t d e s 4 . J a h r t a u s e n d s a b s t a m m e nd t i r f t e n . "

C hap t e r 9 , 'Wr i t i ng and c iv i l i z a t i on ' (w i th i t s s ub -head ings " im-p o r t a n c e o f w r i t i n g , w r i t in g a n d s p e e ch , w r i t in g a n d a r t , w r i t i n g a n dre l i g ion ) cove r s i n a ve ry i n t e r e s t i ng manne r a good dea l o f impor t an tm a t e r i a l . T h e c o n c l u d i n g c h a p t e r e n t i tl e d ' F u t u r e o f w r i t i n g ' i s as u m m a t i o n o f t h e a u t h o r ' s v i e w s a n d g i v e s h i m a n o p p o r t u n i t y t omen t ion and b r i e f l y d i s cus s s uch t op i c s a s ' v i s i b l e s peech ' , ana lpha -b e t i e n o t a t i o n , a n d t h e I P A s y s t e m o f w a it in g . T h e b o o k cl os es w i t ha s h o r t s e ct io n i n w h i c h t h e t e r m i n o l o g y u s e d t h r o u g h o u t is c o l le c t e da n d d e fi n ed . T h i s is f o ll ow e d b y a r a t h e r c o m p l e t e b i b l i o g r a p h y r a n g i n gf r o m w o r k s d e a l in g w i t h g e n e r a l p r o b l e m s a n d s u r v e y s t o i n s t r u c t i v e

1) A. Pohl, Keilschrif tbibliographie 14, Or i e n t a l i a 21.337 (1952).


8/8

biMiographical reference for specific writ :hag syste m s f rom all p a r ts ofthe world. There are also ninety-five well chosen and well re pro du ce dil lustrat ions which enhance the prose a ccounts of pa rt ic ula r prob lem s.

This review has at tempted in general to give an overal l p icture ofthe contents of A s t u d y o / w r i t i n g paus ing t o com m en t , am pl ify , a ndcriticize only at random . Any criticism offered here is wr itt en in a sp iri tof amplificat ion with no intent to detract: from th e esse ntial va lue an doriginali ty of this treatmen t of writing. Th ere are st i ll m a n y ch ap ter s tobe written, none the least of which is an adeq uate tr ea tm en t of writ in gsystems from the point of view of their expression of the phonemicsystems of the languages for which they are used. Perhaps the longperiod of gestation in the writing of this book (to whic h G elb allud es inthe introduction) is to be blamed for the lack o f' co ns ide ra tio n ofphonemics in some areas where such a t rea tm ent would hav e beenhighly pertinent. It would be wholly superfluous to point out someminor typographical errors which will cause no trouble to a ny re ad erof this boo k. In this reviewer's opinion, Ge lb's bo ok re pr es en ts arevolution in yet another philological domain pointing the waytoward systematization, description, and analysis of writing systems.Gelb has succeeded admirably in laying the fou nd ation s to 'gr am -matology'. Let us now go on from here.Department o~ New Eastern StudiesUniversity o~ MichiganA n n A th o r, M i ch i g a n

HERBERT H. PAPER

the study of wrinting (prólogo libro de gelb)

Documents