Re: Order of logograms

David J. Peterson wrote:
[snip]

> goes for both languages, with a dual-language dictionary.  For
> example, in Egyptian dictionaries, symbols are ordered by
> phonetic value, but the order of phonetic values was determined,
> as far as I know, by an Egyptologist; there's nothing inherent
> to the Egyptian language about the order.  (Or, perhaps it was
> based on the Greek order.)
No, certainly nothing to do with the Greek order (which, ultimately, is
derived from the Semitic abjad order). I had always assumed that the
Egyptian order was based on ancient Egyptian scribal practice. After
all, presumably there was some sort of standard order would have been
used when teaching young scribes. But I know of no evidence for this.

Maybe the order was devised by Champollion?

Thinks: I'd better do some research  ;)

   [snip]
>
> In my orthographic language X, since I speak English, I gave each
> glyph an English name, and they're ordered in that way in
> English alphabetical order--
...which, of course, is based on the Roman order, which is derived from
the western Greek order, which is derived from the archaic Greek order,
which is derived from the Phoenician abjad order, which is due to ???

AFAIK no one knows why the Semitic abjad was ordered as it was.

[snip]

> ........  In the back of my Egyptian book, there are
> several lists of glyphs, to wit:
>
> (1) Dictionary-style: All words are listed in phonemic order.
> (2) Numbered: Arbitrary numbers are assigned to glyphs.
> (3) Shape: Long glyphs, flat glyphs, round glyphs...
> (4) Theme: Human glyphs, bird glyphs, religious glyphs...
I have a book in which signs are assigned a letter and number; the
letter denotes the type of sign, e.g. A = people or parts of body; B =
creatures or parts of their body; C = sky, earth, water or plants; D =
other small signs; E = other tall signs, etc. The number denotes its
position in each list.

> In the last two lists, each glyph is numbered with the number it
> gets it the numbered list, so you can cross-reference.  I think this
> would be ideal for an online-database (e.g., each glyph is pre-linked
> to a definition of that glyph, as well as some words it appears in,
> and there are lists by shape, theme, size, etc.).  I'm sure there are
> a number of creative ways it can be done.
I am quite certain there are  :)

--
Ray
==================================
ray@carolandray.plus.com
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
TRADUTTORE TRADITORE