Re: Divergent Scripts

John Cowan writes:
 > Tim May scripsit:
 >
 > > Really?  When did Chinese script become a syllabary? (Other than in
 > > Japan*, etc.)  It still looks logographic to me. ;-)
 >
 > It's morpho-syllabic: there is one representation for each syllable
 > with a particular meaning.  If it were really logographic, there would be
 > a different character for every word, which is certainly not the case.
 > Most words are written with at least two characters.
 >

Well, true enough, but I didn't think of the term morpho-syllabic, and
logographic is closer than syllabary.  I didn't claim it was _ideographic_.