Re: Abugidas (was: Chinese writing systems)

Florian Rivoal writes:
 > >This sounds more like a featural syllabary, like Hangul.
 >
 > Hangul is not at all a syllabary. It is definitly an alphabet. You
 > can be tricted because characters are grouped by syllab, but it is
 > only visual.
 >

I'm not sure that that's a meaningful distinction.  You can equally
view each grouping as a regularly constructed syllabic character -
this is how Korean fonts work.  It's generally considered an alphabet,
but I've seen reference books that refer to it a syllabary.