<figure><img src="image_117.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 1. Letter-sound correlations of the conventional orthographies: we averaged the correlation coefficients from various fonts only when *p*-value < .1.</figcaption></figure>

<table><caption>TABLE 2. The letter-sound correlations in 10 Arabic fonts. Note: * *p* < .05, ** *p* < .01, *** *p* < .001, *N* = 378, phonological distance *M* = 1.46, *SD* = 0.27 (Euclidean); *M* = 2.46, *SD* = 1.43 (feature edit); orthographical distance *M* = 10.50, *SD* = 2.64</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Font</th><th rowspan="2">Example</th><th colspan="2">Euclidean distance</th><th colspan="2">feature edit distance</th></tr><tr><th>r</th><th>p-value</th><th>r</th><th>p-value</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Simplified Arabic</td><td>تَشْرِفْ بِمَقَابِلِتِكَ</td><td>0.15</td><td>&lt; .001</td><td>***</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.05</td><td>*</td></tr><tr><td>Arial Black</td><td>تَشْرِفْ بِمَقَابِلِتِكَ</td><td>0.13</td><td>0.01</td><td>**</td><td>0.09</td><td>0.07</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Times New Roman</td><td>تَشْرِفْ بِمَقَابِلِتِكَ</td><td>0.13</td><td>0.01</td><td>**</td><td>0.09</td><td>0.07</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Arabic Typesetting</td><td>تَشْرِفْ بِمَقَابِلِتِكَ</td><td>0.12</td><td>0.02</td><td>*</td><td>0.02</td><td>0.74</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Traditional Arabic</td><td>تَشْرِفْ بِمَقَابِلِتِكَ</td><td>0.11</td><td>0.03</td><td>*</td><td>0.04</td><td>0.42</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Courier New</td><td>تَشْرِفْ بِمَقَابِلِتِكَ</td><td>0.07</td><td>0.2</td><td></td><td>0.05</td><td>0.32</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Microsoft Sans Serif</td><td>تَشْرِفْ بِمَقَابِلِتِكَ</td><td>0.05</td><td>0.37</td><td></td><td>0.12</td><td>0.02</td><td>**</td></tr><tr><td>Segoe UI</td><td>تَشْرِفْ بِمَقَابِلِتِكَ</td><td>0.04</td><td>0.38</td><td></td><td>0.12</td><td>0.02</td><td>**</td></tr><tr><td>Andalus</td><td>تَشْرِفْ بِمَقَابِلِتِكَ</td><td>0.04</td><td>0.45</td><td></td><td>0.05</td><td>0.29</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Tahoma</td><td>تَشْرِفْ بِمَقَابِلِتِكَ</td><td>-0.01</td><td>0.83</td><td></td><td>0.11</td><td>0.03</td><td>**</td></tr></tbody></table>

English

For upper cases, Cambria consistently returned correlation: *r* = .11, *p* = .07 when measured by Euclidean distance, *r* = .12, *p* = .04 when measured by feature edit distance. Gabriola (*r* = .12, *p* = .04), Georgia (*r* = .10, *p* = .08), and Impact (*r* = .15, *p* = .01) additionally showed the result when measured by feature edit distance only. For lower cases, Franklin Gothic Medium (*r* = .15, *p* = .01), Arial Black (*r* = .14, *p* = .02),
Verdana (*r* = .14, *p* = .02), Cambria (*r* = .13, *p* = .03), and Tahoma (*r* = .12, *p* = .04) returned the results only when measured by feature edit distance.

## Finnish

Significant systematicity was found only in uppercase Courier New (*r* = .12, *p* = .02). For lower cases, Segoe Script (*r* = .10, *p* = .05 measured by Euclidean distance) and Trebuchet MS (*r* = .11, *p* = .04, measured by feature edit distance) returned coefficient above significance level.

## Greek

For upper cases, Courier New consistently showed robust coefficient: *r* = .15, *p* = .02 measured by Euclidean distance, *r* = .16, *p* = .02 measured by feature edit distance. Book Antiqua (*r* = .13, *p* = .04) was also significant when measured by Euclidean distance. Although marginal, the lowercase Courier New returned the negative correlation (*r* = -.11, *p* = .09) when measured by Euclidean distance.

## Hebrew

All 13 fonts returned highly significant correlation coefficients (Table 3). Some fonts returned letter-sound systematicity even higher than that of Korean orthography.

## Korean

Almost all 88 Korean fonts returned significant letter-sound correlation, including a few representative fonts: *굴림*: *r* = .24, *p* < .001; *바탕*: *r* = .18, *p* < .001; *궁서*: *r* = .30, *p* < .001; *ibun* and *go Dak*: *r* = .18, *p* < .001. KCC 은영 returned the highest coefficient: *r* = .39, *p* < .001. We re-calculated the correlation excluding each letter to investigate which contributes the most to the whole correlation. Each letter seems to contribute approximately equally to the whole letter-sound correlation.

## Other Orthographies

None of the four ancient orthographies returned significant systematicity; nor did the two fictitious orthographies. We conducted Monte-Carlo permutation tests for verification.

The two English substitute writing systems returned high positive letter-sound correlations: *Pitman's shorthand*, in which *r* = .35, *p* < .001; and the *Shavian alphabet*, *r* = .2, *p* < .001.
<table><caption>TABLE 3. The letter-sound correlation *r* in 13 Hebrew fonts (all *p*-value < .001). Note: * *p* < .05, ** *p* < .01, *** *p* < .001, *N* = 1035, phonological distance *M* = 1.91, *SD* = 0.43 (Euclidean); *M* = 3.14, *SD* = 1.79 (feature edit); orthographical distance *M* = 15.57, *SD* = 9.89</caption><thead><tr><th>Font</th><th>Example</th><th>Euclidean distance</th><th>Feature edit distance</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Levenim MT</td><td>שלום</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.31</td></tr><tr><td>Narkisim</td><td>שלום</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.31</td></tr><tr><td>Miriam</td><td>שלום</td><td>0.34</td><td>0.31</td></tr><tr><td>Times New Roman</td><td>שלום</td><td>0.34</td><td>0.31</td></tr><tr><td>David</td><td>שלום</td><td>0.33</td><td>0.3</td></tr><tr><td>Lucida Sans Unicode</td><td>שלום</td><td>0.30</td><td>0.28</td></tr><tr><td>Gisha</td><td>שלום</td><td>0.27</td><td>0.27</td></tr><tr><td>Arial</td><td>שלום</td><td>0.25</td><td>0.26</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Arial Black</strong></td><td>שלום</td><td>0.25</td><td>0.26</td></tr><tr><td>Calibri Light</td><td>שלום</td><td>0.25</td><td>0.26</td></tr><tr><td>Microsoft Sans Serif</td><td>שלום</td><td>0.24</td><td>0.27</td></tr><tr><td>Courier New</td><td>ece</td><td>0.21</td><td>0.23</td></tr><tr><td>Tahoma</td><td>ece</td><td>0.18</td><td>0.24</td></tr></tbody></table>

## 4. Discussion

We explored the systematicity of letter-sound mapping over a number of orthographies, from a new perspective. Seven conventional orthographies, as well as two reformed spelling systems, demonstrated that letters to some extent correlate with their pronunciations. *Hangeul*, the systematically invented orthography with a sophisticated understanding of phonology, constitutes the highest benchmark of letter-sound correlation; other artificial orthographies, *Pitman's shorthand* and the *Shavian alphabet* returned a similarly high correlation. Letter-sound correlation increases when visually similar figures are linked to articulatorily similar phonemes (e.g., <ہ> /k/ - <ر> /g/ or <ي> /t/ - <ق> /d/). This fact explains why Hebrew also demonstrated a high correlation. The visual difference of letter shapes efficiently categorise the place of articulation and distinguish voiceless from voiced sounds (e.g., /k/ - /x/ or /v/ - /b/ in Appendix 5). The systematicity of an orthography is enhanced when adding or subtracting a stroke or the orientation change of letter shapes occurs systematically with the corresponding phoneme pairs (e.g., voiced-voiceless).

Comparatively low coefficients of the orthographies with Roman alphabets (Cyrillic, English, Finnish, and Greek) may be attributable to their complicated history. They originated from Phoenician alphabets
(1000 BC), known as the first stable alphabetic script (Havelock, 1976; Robinson, 1995). It diverged to Hebrew and Greek, and the latter was borrowed by the Romans. The Roman alphabets spread through Europe and one of the lineages settled down as the English alphabets (Havelock, 1976; Robinson, 1995; Rogers, 2005). Some 3000 years of the history of this *Northwest Semitic Graeco-Roman-Etruscan alphabet* (Havelock, 1976) naturally allowed cultural intervention, sometimes organized (ibid.; Robinson, 1995; Rogers, 2005). For example, when Phoenician 22-consonant alphabets were accepted by Greeks, some phonetic values (mostly weak consonants) were changed to vowels. At the same time, three more vowels were added, resulting in 25 characters in total. Later, Runes, the Germanic alphabets entered Roman culture, influencing some of their letters: r, i, and b. Middle English went through the *Great English Vowel Shift*, as well as the distinction of upper cases from lower cases.

We expected the modern European alphabet systems to demonstrate stronger systematicity than the ancient orthographies. Four ancient orthographies did not show significant systematicity. The authenticity of the phonemes (and characters) recovered (Havelock, 1976; Robinson, 1995) may be not perfectly reliable.

In conclusion, the human brain is adept at taking advantage of any type of systematicity, from the level of the neural substrate to cross-modality processing (Bavelier and Neville, 2002; Spence, 2011). There are many demonstrations of audio-visual multisensory perception (Baier, Kleinschmidt, and Müller, 2006; Calvert, Brammer, et al., 1999; Calvert, Campbell, and Brammer, 2000; Calvert, Hansen, Iversen, and Brammer, 2001; Fiebelkorn, Foxe, and Molholm, 2010; Kriegstein and Giraud, 2006; Zangenehpour and Zatorre, 2010), some of which specifically focus on grapheme-phoneme relations (Raij, Uutela, and Hari, 2000; Atteveldt, Formisano, Goebel, and Blomert, 2004; Weissman, Warner, and Woldorff, 2004). Although the data generally imply that no area is exclusively related to reading, the human brain certainly has the wherewithal to take advantage of the type of systematicity we have demonstrated in the relation between letters and their canonical pronunciation. One potential process underlying the emergence of systematicity may be Zipf's principle of least effort (Zipf, 1949), whereby least effort in pronunciation travels with least effort in writing a character, with these processes conditioning the pairwise distances within phonological and visual space.

## References

* Atteveldt, N. van et al. (2004). "Integration of letters and speech sounds in the human brain." In: *Neuron* 43.2, pp. 271-282.
Baier, B., A. Kleinschmidt, and N.G. Müller (2006). "Cross-modal processing in early visual and auditory cortices depends on expected statistical relationship of multisensory information." In: *Journal of Neuroscience* 26.47, pp. 12260-12265.

Bavelier, D. and H.J. Neville (2002). "Cross-modal plasticity: where and how?" In: *Nature Reviews Neuroscience* 3.6, pp. 443-452.

Brekle, H.E. (1994). "Some thoughts on a historico-genetic theory of the lettershapes of our alphabet." In: *Writing systems and cognition: Perspectives from psychology, physiology, linguistics, and semiotics*. Ed. by W. Watt. Berlin: Springer.

Calvert, G.A., M.J. Brammer, et al. (1999). "Response amplification in sensory-specific cortices during crossmodal binding." In: *Neuroreport* 10.12, pp. 2619-2623.

Calvert, G.A., R. Campbell, and M.J. Brammer (2000). "Evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging of crossmodal binding in the human heteromodal cortex." In: *Current Biology* 10.11, pp. 649-657.

Calvert, G.A. et al. (2001). "Detection of audio-visual integration sites in humans by application of electrophysiological criteria to the BOLD effect." In: *Neuroimage* 14.2, pp. 427-438.

Dautriche, I., E. Chemla, and A. Christophe (2016). "Word learning: Homophony and the distribution of learning exemplars." In: *Language Learning and Development* 12.3, pp. 231-251.

Dautriche, I. et al. (2017). "Wordform similarity increases with semantic similarity: An analysis of 100 languages." In: *Cognitive science* 41.8, pp. 2149-2169.

Dingemanse, M. et al. (2015). "Arbitrariness, iconicity, and systematicity in language." In: *Trends in Cognitive Sciences* 19.10, pp. 603-615.

Erfani, I.M. (2005). *Arabic for Beginners*. Ottawa: Laurier Books Limited.

Farmer, T.A., M.H. Christiansen, and P. Monaghan (2006). "Phonological typicality influences on-line sentence comprehension." In: *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences* 103.32, pp. 12203-12208.

Fiebelkorn, I.C., J.J. Foxe, and S. Molholm (2010). "Dual mechanisms for the cross-sensory spread of attention: how much do learned associations matter?" In: *Cerebral Cortex* 20.1, pp. 109-120.

Harm, M.W. and M.S. Seidenberg (1999). "Phonology, reading acquisition, and dyslexia: insights from connectionist models." In: *Psychological review* 106.3, pp. 491-528.

Havelock, E.A. (1976). *Origins of Western Literacy. Four Lectures delivered at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education*. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

Huttenlocher, D.P., G.A. Klanderman, and W.J. Rucklidge (1993). "Comparing images using the Hausdorff distance." In: *IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence* 15.9, pp. 850-863.

Kriegstein, K. von and A.L. Giraud (2006). "Implicit multisensory associations influence voice recognition." In: *PLoS biology* 4.10.
Lloyd, S. et al. (1998). *The phonics handbook*. Chigwell: Jolly Learning.

Mantel, N. (1967). *The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach*. Cancer Research.

Monaghan, P. et al. (2014). “How arbitrary is language?” In: *Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences* 369.1651.

Raij, T., K. Uutela, and R. Hari (2000). “Audiovisual integration of letters in the human brain.” In: *Neuron* 28.2, pp. 617–625.

Robinson, A. (1995). *The story of writing*. London: Thames and Hudson.

Rogers, H. (2005). *Writing systems: A linguistic approach*. Oxford: Blackwell.

Sampson, G. (1985). *Writing systems*. London: Hutchinson.

Schmandt-Besserat, D. (1989). *Two precursors of writing: Plain and complex tokens*. *The origins of writing*.

Seymour, P.H., M. Aro, and J.M. Erskine (2003). “Collaboration with COST Action A8 Network.” In: *British Journal of psychology* 94.2, pp. 143–174.

Shillcock, R.C. et al. (2001). “Filled pauses and their status in the mental lexicon.” In: *Proc. 2001 Conf. of Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech*, pp. 53–56.

Sirat, C. (1994). “Handwriting and the writing hand.” In: *Writing systems and cognition: Perspectives from psychology, physiology, linguistics, and semiotics*. Ed. by W. Watt. Berlin: Springer.

Spence, C. (2011). “Crossmodal correspondences: A tutorial review. Attention, Perception, and.” In: *Psychophysics* 73.4, pp. 971–995.

Tamariz, M. (2008). “Exploring systematicity between phonological and context-cooccurrence representations of the mental lexicon.” In: *The Mental Lexicon* 3.2, pp. 259–278.

Watt, W.C. (1979). “Iconic equilibrium.” In: *Semiotica* 28.1–2, pp. 31–62.

——— (1994). *Curves as angles. In Writing systems and cognition: Perspectives from psychology, physiology, linguistics, and semiotics (Vol.)* Ed. by W. Watt. Berlin: Springer.

——— (2013). *Writing systems and cognition: Perspectives from psychology, physiology, linguistics, and semiotics (Vol. 6)*. Berlin: Springer.

Weissman, D.H. van, L.M. Warner, and M.G. Woldorff (2004). “The neural mechanisms for minimizing cross-modal distraction.” In: *Journal of Neuroscience* 24.48, pp. 10941–10949.

Zangenehpour, S. and R.J. Zatorre (2010). “Crossmodal recruitment of primary visual cortex following brief exposure to bimodal audiovisual stimuli.” In: *Neuropsychologia* 48.2, pp. 591–600.

Zipf, G.K. (1949). *Human behavior and the principle of least-effort*. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
## B. Cyrillic

<table><caption>TABLE 6. Cyrillic letters and their phonemes</caption><thead><tr><th>Upper</th><th>Lower</th><th>Phoneme</th><th>Upper</th><th>Lower</th><th>Phoneme</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>А</td><td>а</td><td>/a/</td><td>О</td><td>о</td><td>/o/</td></tr><tr><td>Б</td><td>б</td><td>/b/</td><td>П</td><td>п</td><td>/p/</td></tr><tr><td>В</td><td>в</td><td>/v/</td><td>Р</td><td>р</td><td>/r/</td></tr><tr><td>Г</td><td>г</td><td>/g/</td><td>С</td><td>с</td><td>/s/</td></tr><tr><td>Д</td><td>д</td><td>/d/</td><td>Т</td><td>т</td><td>/t/</td></tr><tr><td>Ж</td><td>ж</td><td>/ʒ/</td><td>У</td><td>у</td><td>/u/</td></tr><tr><td>З</td><td>з</td><td>/z/</td><td>Ф</td><td>ф</td><td>/f/</td></tr><tr><td>И</td><td>и</td><td>/i/</td><td>Х</td><td>х</td><td>/x/</td></tr><tr><td>Й</td><td>й</td><td>/j/</td><td>Ц</td><td>ц</td><td>/ts/</td></tr><tr><td>К</td><td>к</td><td>/k/</td><td>Ч</td><td>ч</td><td>/tʃ/</td></tr><tr><td>Л</td><td>л</td><td>/l/</td><td>Ш</td><td>ш</td><td>/ʃ/</td></tr><tr><td>М</td><td>м</td><td>/m/</td><td>Щ</td><td>щ</td><td>/ʃt/</td></tr><tr><td>Н</td><td>н</td><td>/n/</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>TABLE 7. The features of Cyrillic phonemes</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Upper letters<br>Lower letters<br>Phonemes</th><th colspan="6">Place of Articulation</th><th colspan="5">Manner of Articulation</th><th colspan="6">Vowel Qualities</th></tr><tr><th>Voiced</th><th>Bilabial</th><th>Labio-dental</th><th>Alveolar</th><th>Palatal</th><th>Velar</th><th>Post-alveolar</th><th>Nasal</th><th>Plosive</th><th>Affricate</th><th>Fricative</th><th>Trill</th><th>Approximant</th><th>Close</th><th>Mid</th><th>Open</th><th>Front</th><th>Central</th><th>Back</th><th>Roundness</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>А</td><td>а</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Б</td><td>б</td><td>і</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>В</td><td>в</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Г</td><td>г</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Д</td><td>д</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Ж</td><td>ж</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>З</td><td>з</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>И</td><td>и</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Й</td><td>й</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>К</td><td>к</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Л</td><td>л</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>М</td><td>м</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Н</td><td>н</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>О</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>і</td><td>і</td></tr><tr><td>П</td><td>п</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Р</td><td>р</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>С</td><td>с</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Т</td><td>т</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>У</td><td>у</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>і</td><td>і</td></tr><tr><td>Ф</td><td>ф</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Х</td><td>х</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Ц</td><td>ц</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Ч</td><td>ч</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Ш</td><td>ш</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr><tr><td>Щ</td><td>щ</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>і</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td><td>о</td></tr></tbody></table>
C. Finnish

<table><caption>TABLE 8. Finnish letters and their phonemic features</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Letter</th><th rowspan="2">Phoneme</th><th colspan="5">Place of Articulation</th><th colspan="4">Manner of Articulation</th><th colspan="5">Vowel Quality</th></tr><tr><th>Voiced</th><th>Labial</th><th>Alveolar</th><th>Palatal</th><th>Velar</th><th>Glottal</th><th>Nasal</th><th>Plosive</th><th>Fricative</th><th>Approximant</th><th>Trill</th><th>Close</th><th>Mid</th><th>Open</th><th>Front</th><th>Back</th><th>Roundness</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>a</td><td>ɑ</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>b</td><td>b</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>c</td><td>s</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>d</td><td>d</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>e</td><td>e</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>f</td><td>f</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>g</td><td>g</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>h</td><td>h</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>i</td><td>i</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>j</td><td>j</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>k</td><td>k</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>l</td><td>l</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>m</td><td>m</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>n</td><td>n</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>p</td><td>p</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>q</td><td>q</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>r</td><td>r</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>s</td><td>s</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>t</td><td>t</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>u</td><td>u</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>v</td><td>v</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>w</td><td>w</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>y</td><td>y</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>z</td><td>z</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>ä</td><td>æ</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>ö</td><td>ö</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>å</td><td>å</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>1</td></tr></tbody></table>
D. Greek

<table><caption>TABLE 9. Greek letters and their phonemes</caption><thead><tr><th>Upper</th><th>Lower</th><th>Phoneme</th><th>Upper</th><th>Lower</th><th>Phoneme</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>A</td><td>α</td><td>/a/</td><td>N</td><td>ν</td><td>/n/</td></tr><tr><td>B</td><td>β</td><td>/v/</td><td>O</td><td>ο</td><td>/o/</td></tr><tr><td>Γ</td><td>γ</td><td>/γ/</td><td>Π</td><td>π</td><td>/p/</td></tr><tr><td>Δ</td><td>δ</td><td>/δ/</td><td>P</td><td>ρ</td><td>/r/</td></tr><tr><td>E</td><td>ε</td><td>/e/</td><td>Σ</td><td>σ</td><td>/s/</td></tr><tr><td>Z</td><td>ζ</td><td>/z/</td><td>Σ</td><td>ς</td><td>/s/</td></tr><tr><td>H</td><td>η</td><td>/i/</td><td>T</td><td>τ</td><td>/t/</td></tr><tr><td>Θ</td><td>θ</td><td>/θ/</td><td>Υ</td><td>υ</td><td>/i/</td></tr><tr><td>I</td><td>ι</td><td>/i/</td><td>Φ</td><td>φ</td><td>/f/</td></tr><tr><td>K</td><td>κ</td><td>/k/</td><td>X</td><td>χ</td><td>/x/</td></tr><tr><td>Λ</td><td>λ</td><td>/l/</td><td>Ω</td><td>ω</td><td>/o/</td></tr><tr><td>M</td><td>μ</td><td>/m/</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>TABLE 10. The features of Greek phonemes</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Upper letter</th><th rowspan="2">Lower letter</th><th rowspan="2">Phonemes</th><th colspan="8">Place of Articulation</th><th colspan="2">Manner of Articulation</th><th colspan="5">Vowel Qualities</th></tr><tr><th>Voiced</th><th>Bilabial</th><th>Labio-dental</th><th>Alveolar</th><th>Velar</th><th>Dental</th><th>Nasal</th><th>Plosive</th><th>Fricative</th><th>Lateral approximant</th><th>Trill</th><th>Close</th><th>Close-mid</th><th>Mid-back</th><th>Open</th><th>Central</th><th>Front</th><th>Back</th><th>Roundness</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>A</td><td>α</td><td>a</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>B</td><td>β</td><td>ν</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>Γ</td><td>γ</td><td>γ</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>Δ</td><td>δ</td><td>δ</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>E</td><td>ε</td><td>e</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>Z</td><td>ζ</td><td>z</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>H</td><td>η</td><td>i</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>Θ</td><td>θ</td><td>θ</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>I</td><td>ι</td><td>i</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>K</td><td>κ</td><td>k</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>Λ</td><td>λ</td><td>l</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>M</td><td>μ</td><td>m</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>N</td><td>ν</td><td>n</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>O</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>Π</td><td>π</td><td>p</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>P</td><td>ρ</td><td>r</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>Σ</td><td>σ</td><td>s</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>Σ</td><td>ς</td><td>s</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>T</td><td>τ</td><td>t</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>Υ</td><td>υ</td><td>i</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>Φ</td><td>φ</td><td>f</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>X</td><td>χ</td><td>x</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>Ω</td><td>ω</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ι</td><td>o</td></tr></tbody></table>
E. Hebrew

<table><caption>TABLE 11. Hebrew letters and their phonemes</caption><thead><tr><th>Letter</th><th>Phoneme</th><th>Letter</th><th>Phoneme</th><th>Letter</th><th>Phoneme</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>א</td><td>empty</td><td>כ</td><td>/k/</td><td>פ</td><td>/p/</td></tr><tr><td>ב</td><td>/v/</td><td>כ</td><td>/x/</td><td>פ</td><td>/f/</td></tr><tr><td>ב</td><td>/b/</td><td>ד</td><td>/k/</td><td>פ</td><td>/f/</td></tr><tr><td>ג</td><td>/g/</td><td>ד</td><td>/x/</td><td>צ</td><td>/ts/</td></tr><tr><td>ד</td><td>/d/</td><td>ל</td><td>/l/</td><td>צ</td><td>/ts/</td></tr><tr><td>ה</td><td>/h/</td><td>מ</td><td>/m/</td><td>ק</td><td>/k/</td></tr><tr><td>י</td><td>/y/</td><td>ס</td><td>/m/</td><td>ר</td><td>/r/</td></tr><tr><td>ז</td><td>/z/</td><td>נ</td><td>/n/</td><td>ש</td><td>/sh/</td></tr><tr><td>ח</td><td>/x/</td><td>ו</td><td>/n/</td><td>ש</td><td>/s/</td></tr><tr><td>ט</td><td>/t/</td><td>ס</td><td>/s/</td><td>ע</td><td>/t/</td></tr><tr><td>י</td><td>/j/</td><td>ע</td><td>emp</td><td>ת</td><td>/t/</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>TABLE 12. The features of Hebrew phonemes</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Letter<br>Phoneme</th><th colspan="6">Place of Articulation</th><th colspan="6">Manner of Articulation</th></tr><tr><th>Voiced</th><th>Bilabial</th><th>Labio-dental</th><th>Alveolar</th><th>Palatal</th><th>Velar</th><th>Glottal</th><th>Post-alveolar</th><th>Nasal</th><th>Plosive</th><th>Affricate</th><th>Fricative</th><th>Lateral approx.<br>Approximant</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>א</td><td>-</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ב</td><td>b</td><td>ı</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ב</td><td>v</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ג</td><td>g</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ד</td><td>d</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ה</td><td>h</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ו</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ז</td><td>z</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ח</td><td>x</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ט</td><td>t</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>י</td><td>j</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td></tr><tr><td>כ</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ב</td><td>x</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ק</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ל</td><td>x</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>מ</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td></tr><tr><td>מ</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>נ</td><td>n</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ו</td><td>n</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ס</td><td>s</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ע</td><td>-</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>פ</td><td>p</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>פ</td><td>f</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>פ</td><td>f</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>צ</td><td>ts</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ץ</td><td>ts</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ק</td><td>k</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ר</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ש</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ש</td><td>s</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr><tr><td>ת</td><td>t</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>ı</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td><td>o</td></tr></tbody></table>
## F. Korean

<table><caption>TABLE 13. Visually systematic Korean consonants</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Voiced</th><th>Voiceless</th><th>Tensed</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th>ㄱ</th><td>/g/</td><td>ㄱ</td><td>/k/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄷ</th><td>/d/</td><td>ㄷ</td><td>/t/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄴ</th><td>/b/</td><td>ㄴ</td><td>/p/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄴ</th><td>/s/</td><td>ㄴ</td><td>/p/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄷ</th><td>/dʒ/</td><td>ㄷ</td><td>/tʃ/</td></tr><tr><th>ㅇ</th><td>/ŋ/</td><td>ㅇ</td><td>/h/</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>TABLE 14. Korean mono-thongs included in the study</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Mono-thongs</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><th>ㄱ</th><td>/a/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄷ</th><td>/a/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄴ</th><td>/o/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄷ</th><td>/u/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄴ</th><td>/e/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄷ</th><td>/e/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄹ</th><td>/o/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄴ</th><td>/y/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄷ</th><td>/u/</td></tr><tr><th>ㄴ</th><td>/i/</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>TABLE 15. 88 Korean fonts examined</caption><tr><td>골림</td><td>고건</td><td>FB01철 수 80 목 판 M</td></tr><tr><td>움</td><td>개미동구명</td><td>FB01철 수 90 목 판 TM</td></tr><tr><td>바탕</td><td>신라자</td><td>FB01철 수 90 목 판 M</td></tr><tr><td>궁서</td><td>제주한라산체</td><td>FB01철 수 2000 목 판 TM</td></tr><tr><td>매은고덕</td><td>제주고덕체</td><td>FB01철 수 2001 목 판 M</td></tr><tr><td>나눔고덕</td><td>제주명조체</td><td>FB01철 수 2001 목 판 TM</td></tr><tr><td>나눔명조</td><td>부산체</td><td>Yoon 다정</td></tr><tr><td>나눔손ฐ세게</td><td>고양체</td><td>Yoon 민호</td></tr><tr><td>나눔손ฐ세 팬체</td><td>고양일산체</td><td>Yoon 세 희</td></tr><tr><td>나눔바른고덕</td><td>오성과한음체</td><td>Yoon 야 희</td></tr><tr><td>나눔바른펜</td><td>막경리나체</td><td>Yoon 지영</td></tr><tr><td>나눔스페어</td><td>전리북도체</td><td>Yoon 지희</td></tr><tr><td>나눔스페어라운드</td><td>푸른전남체</td><td>Yoon 페 흐</td></tr><tr><td>Noto Sans CJK KR</td><td>KoPub독움체</td><td>Yoon 폭 수</td></tr><tr><td>Noto Serif CJK KR</td><td>KoPub바탕체</td><td>강은운</td></tr><tr><td>도현제</td><td>다온청년고덕</td><td>이 러 지</td></tr><tr><td>주아체</td><td>EBS주시경체</td><td>윤대민</td></tr><tr><td>한나는11살체</td><td>EBS혼인정음</td><td>한동근체 돈움</td></tr><tr><td>간이벽 온방</td><td>EBS혼인정음새론체</td><td>한동근체 바탕</td></tr><tr><td>대신민주회세</td><td>KBIZ한마음고덕</td><td>KCC 온영</td></tr><tr><td>بول정체</td><td>KBIZ한마음명조</td><td>KCC 길 흐</td></tr><tr><td>대한체</td><td>도서관계체</td><td>한글누리</td></tr><tr><td>월인석 보체</td><td>호국체</td><td>기경해랑체</td></tr><tr><td>고도체</td><td>간이벽 온방</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>아리따通行움</td><td>이롭게바탕체</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>HS불바람체2.0</td><td>tvN 슬거운아니아체</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>HS가을생각체</td><td>디몬몬소리체</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>내거움ige 곳체</td><td>빙그레체</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>HS두부비체</td><td>디웨체</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>가비아솔 미체</td><td>한겨레결체</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>가비아납작블 bol체</td><td>조선일보명조체</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>미생체</td><td>동그라미재단</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>신비는일금살</td><td>FB01철 수 80 목 판 TM</td><td></td></tr></table>
<figure><img src="image_118.png" /></figure>
# A New Approach to the Decipherment of Linear A, Stage 2

## Cryptanalysis and Language Deciphering: A “Brute Force Attack” on an Undeciphered Writing System

Loh Jia Sheng Colin · Francesco Perono Cacciafoco

*Abstract.* This paper discusses the attempt of an algorithmic approach to contribute to the decipherment of Linear A. With the assistance of software developed in Python, Linear A clusters can be compared to various dictionaries of languages respecting a certain degree of chronological and geographical compatibility, as a “brute-force attack” for the reconstruction of new clusters of Linear A symbols.

## 1. Introduction

Linear A is a writing system of the Ancient Aegean Minoan Civilisation of Crete that was in use between approximately 1850 and 1450 BCE (Olivier, 1986). Linear B is a syllabic writing system partly derived from Linear A that was used to transcribe Mycenaean Greek. Both Linear A and Linear B have been discovered by British archaeologist Sir Arthur John Evans during excavations between 1886 and 1901 (Chadwick, 1967). The terms “Linear A” and “Linear B” were formulated by Evans based on the linear structure of inscriptions found on the tablets, in contrast to the pictographic writings that were used extensively during the same time period. Linear A samples were discovered to occur in

<footnote>This study has been funded by the MOE AcRF Tier 1 Research Grant 2017-T1-002-193 *Giving Voice to the Minoan People: The Decipherment of Linear A* (Perono Cacciafoco).</footnote>

<footnote>Loh Jia Sheng Colin ID 0000-0001-7009-5007
School of Physical and Mathematical Sciences,
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
jloh035@e.ntu.edu.sg</footnote>

<footnote>Francesco Perono Cacciafoco ID 0000-0002-0977-063X
Linguistics and Multilingual Studies Programme,
School of Humanities,
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
fcacciafoco@ntu.edu.sg</footnote>
various locations such as Crete, Aegean islands of Kea, Kythera, Melos and Thera, and even mainland Greece (Olivier, 1986).

Currently, the Linear A corpus consists of approximately 1,400 artefacts with Linear A inscriptions, with signs appearing over 7,400 times. A large majority of these Linear A signs was used for administrative documentations found on tablets, roundels and seals (Schoep, 2002). Hypotheses regarding the origin of Linear A script and of the Minoan language include the Luwian Hypothesis, the Semitic Hypothesis and more. These will be discussed in later sections of this paper.

Despite numerous attempts by scholars and glyph-breakers, Linear A continues to remain undeciphered, as researchers' attempts to attribute a language family relation with Linear A have provided only a limited amount of meaningful results. This paper explains the use of a programme written in Python programming language (Eu, Xu, and Perono Cacciafoco, 2019) to isolate potential Linear A clusters for further analysis, with the intention of identifying potential family relations with Linear A and other dictionaries of languages.

## 2. Selected Literature Review

Among the attempts made to decipher Linear A, many involve comparison with Linear B (Petrolito, Petrolito, Perono Cacciafoco, and Winterstein, 2015). Linear B, a syllabic writing system used in Crete, has been deciphered by the architect and philologist Michael Ventris in 1952, with the assistance of the linguist John Chadwick (Chadwick, 1967). They discovered that Linear B was used to transcribe Mycenaean Greek. Given that a large portion of Linear B was a derivation of Linear A, coupled with similarities between signs in both writing systems, there were reasonable justifications to support the conclusion of provisionally assigning Linear B phonetic values to Linear A signs that appear graphically similar. However, attempts to use Linear B directly for deciphering Linear A were unsuccessful. The results appear to be inconclusive as large amounts of 'meaningless' Linear A words were generated (Gordart, 1984). As such, the direct use of Linear B alone might prove to be insufficient to decipher Linear A, thus motivating the studies of a variety of languages that are chronologically and geographically mutually compatible as possible relations to Linear A.

There have been studies carried out to decipher Linear A through potential association of Linear A with other language families. Vladimir Ivanov Georgiev believed that Linear A has connections with Greek. Based on his work published in 1952, Georgiev speculated that the Linear A inscriptions found on Hagha Triada tablets were transcribing Greek. Several studies have also highlighted that Linear A was associated with the Indo-European language family. Studies by Gareth A.
Owens (1999) have postulated the possibility that Linear A might belong to the Indo-European language family with relations to Greek, Sanskrit and Latin. Leonard R. Palmer (1961) proposed that Linear A could be an Anatolian language, possibly Luwian. Palmer posited his hypothesis due to a possible historical event which indicates the invasion of Crete and Greece by Indo-European peoples around the second millennium BC (ibid.), necessitating the migration over to Crete. Similarly, Gregory Nagy (1963) proposed a hypothesis that Linear A was largely similar to Luwian, a language that belongs to the Anatolian branch of the Indo-European language family.

Theories that propose a relationship between Linear A and Luwian have been constantly challenged and remain controversial in the academic community. Critics have indicated that Palmer's work is highly dependent on the interpretations of the Linear A tablets that can entail varied interpretations attributed to a limited understanding of Linear A orthography.

Linear A has also been associated with the Semitic language family. Semitic languages originate from the East of the Mediterranean and are speculated to be in use from around 3800 to 3500 BCE (Olivier, 1986). Based on chronological and geographical facts, Linear A is regarded to be compatible with the Semitic language family. Cyrus H. Gordon (1982), a scholar with an extensive knowledge of Semitic languages, was one of the first to attempt deciphering Linear A through comparison with the Semitic language family. By assigning Linear B phonetic values onto Linear A signs, Gordon was able to identify certain words present in Linear A that appeared to be largely similar to that of those belonging to the Semitic language family, such as Hebrew and Akkadian. Thus, he drew the conclusion that Linear A might be connected to Semitic languages, and West Semitic ones, in particular.

In support of the Semitic Hypothesis, archaeological evidence reveals trade practices by the Minoans over Semitic-speaking languages like Eastern Mediterranean and findings of Minoan-style artefacts discovered in areas that include Cyprus and Canaan (Bradley, 2014). This evidence supports the hypothesis that there was language contact between the language of Linear A and Semitic language family.

Nevertheless, many scholars continue to remain sceptical about Linear A having a language contact with the Semitic language family. Sceptics have argued that Gordon's work on the comparison of Linear A and the Semitic language family has major flaws. Firstly, the matches which Gordon has identified appear to be mainly vocabulary terms. Next, Gordon has adopted a methodology of associating elements from various Semitic languages, like Akkadian and Canaanite, for comparison with Linear A. However, the act of doing so has suggested that the Semitic hypothesis might not be conclusive due to the lack of linguistic evidence.
While some scholars continue to argue against Semitic being a pos-
sible family for the language represented by Linear A script, there are
still recent studies on the decipherment of Linear A suggesting a pos-
sible Semitic connection. Eu, Perono Cacciafoco, and Cavallaro (2019)
studied Linear A libation tables, in an effort to identify Semitic roots
present in recurrences found in these tables. Eu Min et al. obtained
very limited and sporadic matches that do present evidence for the rela-
tion of Linear A to the Semitic language family (Eu, Perono Cacciafoco,
and Cavallaro, 2019).

The small number of such matches could be attributed to the small
sample size of Linear A artefacts to study on, as well as the possibility
that Linear A was used to encode a ritual language, involving a more
complicated writing style.

American scholar John G. Younger set up a Web application<fnref n="1" /> in 2000 dedicated to his work on Linear A, in an effort to provide better access to Linear A resources to other scholars. With the use of Linear B Syllabary, Younger has managed to transcribe most Linear A signs. Furthermore, Younger has attempted a reconstruction of Linear A based on the analytical interpretation of possible shared symbols between Linear A and Linear B. Through such forms of development, Younger was able to locate possible toponyms in Linear A that are pre-Greek but compatible with Linear B transcriptions.

Apart from the above-mentioned hypotheses, there are also other
possible connections proposed by scholars. Margalit Finkelberg (2001)
compared the phonological and morphological profiles of Minoan with
those of other languages, in order to narrow down the range of possible
languages associated with Linear A. The morphological profile of Mi-
noan was compared to Greek, Lydian, Hittite, Luwian and Lycian. This
comparison was based on the preliminary readings of certain Minoan
texts. Consequently, Finkelberg proposed that Linear A might be an
ancestor of Lycian or possibly a distant relative of it.

In recent years, studies on Linear A as well as the decipherment
attempts made by scholars have included an algorithmic approach,
with the introduction of high-computational power. Perono Cacciafoco
(2017) has proposed the possibility of having the Linear A inscriptions
analysed beyond the grammatical level, but through comparisons with
other languages and language families according to the Linear A gram-
matological elements. This novel approach of deciphering Linear A
could result in the reconstruction and recombination of new clusters
of Linear A, based on the languages compared with the Minoan lan-
guage. Peter Z. Revesez (2017) has proposed the language of Linear A
to be connected with the Uralic language family. In his study, Revesez
has introduced an algorithm to obtain the ‘syllabic values of Linear A

<footnote n="1">1. http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/.</footnote>
signs'. With these 'syllabic values', Revesez constructed a dictionary of Uralic-Minoan language that translates Linear A documents from the corpus: published by Louis Godart and Jean-Pierre Olivier in the 70s and 80s of the 20th century, GORILA is a Linear A corpus containing Linear A inscriptions. GORILA contains five volumes (Godart and Olivier, 1976a,b; 1979; 1982; 1985) and was made available digitally on the Web in the 21st century<fnref n="2" />. Like many previous attempts of deciphering Linear A, Revesez's work was heavily scrutinised as cross-family comparisons were not conducted, and the pertinent issue of varied interpretations of the 'syllabic values of Linear A' was not properly addressed in Revesez's work.

While it may appear that deciphering Linear A is an insurmountable challenge, it is often beneficial to consider other perspectives in approaching such problems (Tan, 2018), as an alternative means to attain a solution.

### 3. Methodology and Preparation of Materials

In contrast to past attempts to decipher Linear A, a comprehensive analysis and comparison of Linear A clusters should be conducted beyond the grammatological level, through methods originating in cryptanalysis. By analysing the combinatorial data and comparison frequencies with language families of different natures, new possible clusters of Linear A words can be reconstructed and recombined. This project adopts and expands on the method of a "brute-force attack" to attempt deciphering Linear A, through the use of a programme developed in Python programming language (Eu, Xu, and Perono Cacciafoco, 2019).

For the comparison of Linear A with other languages, a set of documents containing dictionaries of various languages and language families has been generated digitally as input into the programme functions. These documents have data stored in spreadsheet files in order to be easily editable by a human. First, a compiled master list of transcribed Linear A words has been created out of the collections of text and Linear A samples contained in Olivier and Godart's Corpus of Inscriptions in Linear A, namely GORILA vols. 1 to 5 (Godart and Olivier, 1976a,b; 1979; 1982; 1985). The transcription of Linear A words has involved assigning phonetic values of Linear B symbols that appear compatible with the Linear A characters. Symbols in Linear A that do not resemble graphically to any of the symbols present in the Linear B syllabary have been replaced by three-digit numbers. For example, in Haghia Triada tablet HT1, there is a Linear A word transcribed by KU-[AB056]-NU, in

<footnote n="2">2. http://mnamon.sns.it/index.php?page=Risorse&id=19.</footnote>
which the three-digit number '056' is used to denote that unique Linear A symbol (see Fig. 1, where KU, AB056 and NU correspond to 3, M and H resp.).

<figure><img src="image_119.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 1. Pictorial representation for Linear A transcriptions of the HT1 tablet. Source: GORILA vol. 1 (Godart and Olivier, 1976a, p. 3)</figcaption></figure>

A newly reconstructed digital corpus of Linear A signs is used to complement the database of Linear A signs and symbols present in GORILA vols. 1 to 5 (Godart and Olivier, 1976a,b; 1979; 1982; 1985). This allows more rigorous statistical analysis of Linear A signs and sign sequences, as comparative analysis will become much more efficient as compared to the printed version of Godart and Olivier's corpus.

In the future, dictionaries of languages from different language families will be required for comparison with the Linear A clusters. Examples of such dictionaries would include Luwian, Anatolian, Hamito-Semitic and Hittite.

## 4. Overview of the Programme Functions

Our programme aims at the implementation of a “brute-force attack” method as an attempt to decipher Linear A. In the context of cryptography and cryptanalysis, a “brute-force attack” is defined to be “an exhaustive search method in order to recover the secret key in a cryptosystem by testing all possible combinations” (Verdult, 2015). Through clever
optimisations and after a sufficient amount of computation, we aim to
associate a possible language family to the Linear A writing system. The
"brute-force attack" on the Linear A symbols can help in constructing
phoneme *n*-gram databases with respect to the languages of comparison. Consequently, the Python programme aims to develop an automatic procedure for evaluating language sources that would be of "best fit" to Linear A. For the development of the programme, the 'pandas' and 'PyQt' Python modules have been used extensively for the purpose of data analytics and the creation of a graphical user interface (GUI) for the programme. In particular, the programme can be segmented into two portions—the specific decipherment approach (§ 4.3) and the general decipherment approach (§ 4.1). Aside from the aforementioned two portions, we have also incorporated the use of the Linear A fonts into the study of potential clusters of Linear A words found in various Linear A tablets.

## 4.1. General Decipherment (GD) Approach

In the GD function, users can input any spreadsheet file available on
their computers, provided data are stored only in the first column of the
spreadsheet file and the file is in CSV (comma-separated values) format.
Using the `pandas` module, the programme carries out similarity comparisons between the words present in the uploaded file with those of
the Linear A master list. Results generated through the GD function
are displayed in a clear table format consisting of four columns, titled
"Identical Matches," "Linear A word," "Original Word" and "Source". An
example can be seen in Figure 2, in which there are 19 matches obtained
from the programme's GD function. In particular, there are 6 matches
for character "r," each of which originates from a different source, including ZA011b, HT27b and HT85b.

The results of word comparison can be downloaded locally as CSV
files. Allowing an indiscriminate comparison between words from various language dictionaries and lexical lists and the Linear A master list, we can provide a large-scale brute-force attack on the current Linear A corpus while the decipherment of Linear A would involve a more statistical approach.

## 4.2. Modifications to GD

A modified version of GD, named "General Decipherment 2" (GD 2),
will be implemented in the programme. By using the GD 2 function,
users will be able to make dynamic changes in their comparisons and alter, not only the dictionary list, but also the Linear A master list—these
<figure><img src="image_120.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 2. GD results of an unknown dictionary</figcaption></figure>

two will be referenced to as “Comparison Sheet” and “Base Sheet” respectively. This form of comparison will be more beneficial in carrying out a more comprehensive analysis on the clusters of Linear A words, by incorporating the findings in the frequency analysis of the 3-digit numbers available in the SD portion of the programme. The frequency analysis of these numbers will be discussed in later sections of this paper. The only restrictions on the “Base Sheet” is that it is stored in CSV format. In the CSV file, the programme only uses the data stored in the first three columns: “Source,” “New Format” and “Linear A word”. Results obtained from this function will be available for download in CSV format. An example of the results obtained from GD 2 can be seen in Figure 3, where there are 5 matches for the string “kns,” obtained from
the programme's GD 2 function. These matches originate from different sources, including HT86a, HT86b and HT10A.

<figure><img src="image_121.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 3. GD 2 results of an unknown dictionary and modified Linear A master list</figcaption></figure>

Allowing the users with dual choices of file input into the programme will provide a higher degree of freedom for more efficient research and analysis to be conducted on any possible cluster of Linear A words.

## 4.3. Specific Decipherment (SD) Approach

Under the SD function, numerous dictionaries from different language families are incorporated into the programme for comparison with the Linear A words present in the master list. Using a 'consonantal' approach for analysis, in which vowels occurring in words in the dictionaries will be provisionally removed, the programme will carry out a search in the master list to have a one-to-one character match between the Linear A clusters and the modified strings in the dictionaries.

This comparison adopts a consonantal approach that has been introduced for use with the Semitic family languages and Afro-Asiatic lan-
<figure><img src="image_122.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 4. Digital recreation of the Linear A tablet HT 95b. The Linear A word “KU-NI-SU” is circled in red (Perono Cacciafoco and Cavallaro, 2020)</figcaption></figure>

guages such as Ancient Egyptian. The approach has also been adopted for comparison for Indo-European languages. This is because consonantal clusters are more stable and consequently it is easier to highlight morphological parts of lexical items of a language and of their roots. In this aspect of the programme, identical character matches will be collated and displayed in a clear table format with the same four columns as the GD functions. An example of the result can be seen in Figure 5. Through such a comparison, dictionaries with high incidence of similarities can be quickly identified and isolated for further analysis.

As shown in Figure 5, the programme reads the results in four columns. Upon a one-to-one character match between the modified Luwian words as well as the Linear A clusters, the first column would output the results under ‘Identical Matches’. According to the results, the SD function would select the original Luwian word, Linear A words as well as the source of the Linear A word. These would be available in the next three columns, respectively.

Aside from the direct comparison with words between Linear A and dictionaries, the programme function also conducts a series of frequency analyses. By allowing the ‘triplets’ present in Linear A clusters to use any possible character ranging from A to Z, the programme will analyse the frequency in which a character replacing the 3-digit number would achieve a one-to-one character match. An example of the results of the analysis of 3-digit numbers can be seen in Figure 6.

In Figure 7, we have the analysis of the triplets' one-to-one correspondence with the characters ranging from A to Z. It indicates that between the Thracian dictionary and Linear A master list, the triplet '029' has a one-to-one match with <a> one time, <b> three times, <c> five times, etc.
<figure><img src="image_123.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 5. SD comparison results between Luwian dictionary and Linear A master list</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_124.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 6. Digital recreation of the Linear A tablet HT 27b. The Linear A cluster “RE” is circled in red (Perono Cacciafoco and Cavallaro, 2020)</figcaption></figure>

The study of such frequency analyses can serve to justify the replacement of the 'triplet' with the character of the highest frequency of identical match. This process enables the reconstruction of possible new clusters of Linear A words, beyond the available clusters from inscriptions.
<figure><img src="image_125.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 7. SD 3-digit number analysis between a Thracian dictionary and the Linear A master list</figcaption></figure>

## 4.4. Introduction of Linear A Fonts

The Linear A fonts introduced into the programme were created by Sabrina Soo Su-Ann, a fellow member in the Nanyang Technological University Linear A decipherment team. They expand the Unicode chart of Linear A, incorporating variants of Linear A signs.

The introduction of Linear A fonts will be represented by a function known as `LinAfontConv` in the programme. Through it, users can input their own files in Microsoft Excel Open XML Spreadsheet (XLSX) file format, provided they contain four columns labelled "Identical matches," "Linear A Word," "Original Word" and "Source" as shown in Figure 6. The function "LinAfontConv" will consider information under the "Linear A word" column, and display the output as the Linear A characters under another column titled "Linear A fonts". Similarly to the other functions in the programme, users can download the output file, which now contains the additional column "Linear A fonts," locally into their computers, in XLSX format.

Through such forms of linguistic analysis, we are able to identify and study potential clusters using the Linear A characters present in the tablet inscriptions. The incorporation of Linear A fonts will provide a better understanding of how Linear A was used by the Aegean Minoan people as a writing system when compared with various languages and language families.
<table><caption>FIGURE 8. Results after input into “LinAfontConv” function</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Identical Linear A Word</th><th>Original Word</th><th>Source</th><th>Linear A fonts</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>2</td><td>pr</td><td>PARA</td><td>pari</td><td>HT128a</td><td>‡L</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>pr</td><td>PARA</td><td>pari</td><td>PH3a</td><td>‡L</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>pr</td><td>PARE</td><td>pari</td><td>HT 4</td><td>‡Ψ</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>pr</td><td>PURA</td><td>pari</td><td>HT116a</td><td>κL</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>pr</td><td>PURE</td><td>pari</td><td>PK ZA 11</td><td>κΨ</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>srr</td><td>SARARA</td><td>sarra</td><td>HT30</td><td>ΥLs</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>srr</td><td>SIRERE</td><td>sarra</td><td>PH31a</td><td>ΨΨΨ</td></tr></tbody></table>

As seen in Figure 8, data from the input file should be ordered based on “Identical match,” “Linear A word,” “Original Word” and “Source”. The programme will then output the data in the “Linear A word” column into Linear A fonts in the last column.

## 4.5. Preliminary Results and Discussion

With the assistance of the programme, we were able to attest identical matches between Linear A transcriptions and other dictionary lexical items. Figure 9 shows the examples of two consonantal clusters “PR” and “SR”. The consonantal cluster of “PA” is derived from the Linear A cluster “PA-RE,” located in HT4 of GORILA vol. 1 (Godart and Olivier, 1976a). Among the words from Hittite, Thracian, Anatolian, Luwian and Hamito-Semitic language families, with the same syllabic structure, a possible phonetic counterpart could be “PARI” from the Luwian dictionary (Melchert, 1993). The Luwian word “PARI” represents “forth or away” according to the dictionary. Similarly, “PA-RA” in Linear A has a possible counterpart in the Hamito-Semitic word “PARA” (Orel, 1994); “SI-RU” has a possible counterpart in the Thracian word “SIRIU” (Paliga, 2006); “SU-RE” with the Pre-Basque form “SUR” (Trask, 2008). Going through more examples of the consonantal clusters obtained by the programme, we hope to obtain a better understanding of what Linear A words can represent when compared with other language families.

## 5. Conclusion

Overall, to improve the efficacy of the Python programme, there will be only three functions available for users. These three functions are the aforementioned SD function, GD 2 function as well as the “LinAfont-Conv” function.
<table><caption>FIGURE 9. Analysis of results obtained from the programme's SD function</caption><thead><tr><th>Consonantal Cluster</th><th></th><th>Linear A word</th><th>Dictionary Word</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2">PR</td><td></td><td>PA-RE (+Ψ)</td><td>Luwian: PARI<br>(Definition: forth, away)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Found in HT 4</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">PR</td><td></td><td>PA-RA (+Is)</td><td>Hamito-Semitic: PARA<br>(Definition: Equid, Onager)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Found in HT128a, PH3a</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">SR</td><td></td><td>SI-RU (Ψ)</td><td>Thracian: SIRIU<br>(Definition: Vrancea region (Romania))</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Found in HT55a, TR ZA 1, IO ZA 15, PK ZA 10</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">SR</td><td></td><td>SU-RE (Ψ)</td><td>Pre-Basque: SUR<br>(Definition: Pour out)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Found in HT 32</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_126.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 10. Digital recreation of the Linear A tablet HT55a. The Linear A cluster “SI-RU” is circled in red (Perono Cacciafoco and Cavallaro, 2020)</figcaption></figure>

The programme will be provided as an executable. Using the `PyQt` Python module, the programme will have a simple GUI to enable easy access to the functions. A shortcut will be created to enable quick distribution of the programme. This will also allow users to have direct access to the programme even without having the necessary dependencies and Python modules installed on their devices.

The Python programme has the potential to be further developed to enable possible image and text recognition as well as natural language processing through the use of the `TensorFlow` module. The incorporation of Linear A fonts in the programme can also allow the prediction of potential clusters of Linear A signs for further frequency analysis.

While the programme is able to conduct statistical and comparative analysis of dictionaries of various languages compared to Linear A, there are still certain areas of the programme functions that can be further improved.

Furthermore, with just the use of `PyQt` and `pandas` Python modules, the programme is unable to “read” and “render” the Linear A fonts. As a result, the programme will have to employ the use of an external software, such as Microsoft Excel or `TFormula`, to ensure clear data rendering of the results using the Linear A fonts. As an improvement to this con-
straint, the Python module matplotlib will be introduced to render the
Linear A fonts in the programme directly.

No doubt, the task of deciphering Linear A continues to be daunt-
ing to many researchers as the ancient Aegean Minoan writing system
remains an unsolved enigma (Tan, 2018). The systematic and multi-
disciplinary approach consisting in using such a programme to decipher
Linear A would be a shift away from the past philological attempts, as
it involves methods from comparative linguistics and cryptolinguistics.
This is a novel approach to tackle Linear A script and the elusive lan-
guage behind it, and more research in this field will be able to be carried
out.

A brute-force attack to the Linear A texts with our programme allows simultaneous comparison between Linear A and other languages from language families such as the Semitic and the Indo-European families, and provides us with a better understanding of the Minoan language. This could serve as a strong foundation for the crypto-linguistics approach of deciphering Linear A, where further work on Linear A can be carried out to facilitate the identification of a language family to which the Minoan language may belong.

6. Acknowledgements

We wish to acknowledge the funding support for this project from
Nanyang Technological University under the URECA Programme.

We also wish to acknowledge the support and help from Dr Xu Duo-
duo at Nanyang Technological University, School of Humanities, His-
tory Programme, as well as Mr Hu Man Keat and Ms Yu Ying Yao un-
der the Nanyang Research programme (NRP) at Nanyang Technological
University.

References

Bradley, P. (2014). *The Ancient World Transformed*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chadwick, J. (1967). *The decipherment of linear B*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Eu, N., F. Perono Cacciafoco, and F. Cavallaro (2019). "Linear A Libation Tables: A Semitic Connection Explored." In: *Annals of the University of Craiova: Series Philology, Linguistics / Analele Universității Din Craiova: Seria Științe Filologice, Linguistică*. Vol. 41. 1/2, pp. 51-63.
Eu, N., D. Xu, and F. Perono Cacciafoco (2019). “Coding to Decipher Linear A.” In: *Proceedings of the 2019 Pacific Neighbourhood Consortium Annual Conference and Joint Meetings (PNC)*. Singapore: Nanyang Technological University, pp. 44–48.

Finkelberg, M. (2001). “The Language of Linear A: Greek, Semitic, or Anatolian?” In: *Greater Anatolia and the Indo-Hittite Language Family*. Ed. by R. Drews. Vol. 38. Journal of Indo-European Monograph: Series, pp. 81–105.

Godart, L. (1984). “Du linéaire A au linéaire B.” In: *Aux origines de l’hellénisme: La Crète et la Grèce*. Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, pp. 121–128.

Godart, L. and J.-P. Olivier (1976a). *Recueil des inscriptions en linéaire A. 1. Tablettes éditées avant 1970*. Vol. 21. Études crétoises. Paris: Librairie orientaliste Paul Geuthner.

——— (1976b). *Recueil des inscriptions en linéaire A. 3. Tablettes, nodules et rondelles édités en 1975 et 1976*. Vol. 21.3. Études crétoises. Paris: Librairie orientaliste Paul Geuthner.

——— (1979). *Recueil des inscriptions en linéaire A. 2. Nodules, scellés et rondelles édités avant 1970*. Vol. 21.2. Études crétoises. Paris: Librairie orientaliste Paul Geuthner.

——— (1982). *Recueil des inscriptions en linéaire A. 4. Autres documents*. Vol. 21.4. Études crétoises. Paris: Librairie orientaliste Paul Geuthner.

——— (1985). *Recueil des inscriptions en linéaire A. 5. Addenda, corrigenda, concordances, index et planches des signes*. Vol. 21.5. Études crétoises. Paris: Librairie orientaliste Paul Geuthner.

Gordon, C. H. (1982). *Forgotten scripts: Their ongoing discovery and decipherment*. New York: Basic Books.

Melchert, Craig H. (1993). “Cuneiform Luvian Lexicon.” In: vol. 2. Lexica Anatolica. Chapell Hill, NC: self-published.

Nagy, G. (1963). *Greek-like Elements in Linear A*. Durham: William H. Willis.

Olivier, J.-P. (1986). “Cretan writing in the second millennium BC.” In: *World Archaeology* 17.3, pp. 377–389.

Orel, V. (1994). “On the ancient contacts between Hamito-Semitic and north Caucasian.” In: *Folia Linguistica Historica* 15.1–2.

Owens, G. A. (1999). “The Structure of the Minoan Language.” In: *J. Indo-Eur. Stud. 27.1/2*, pp. 15–56.

Paliga, Sorin (2006). *Etymological Lexicon of the Indigenous (Thracian) Elements in Romanian*. București: Editura Evenimentul.

Palmer, L. R. (1961). *Myceneans and Minoans: Aegean pre-history in the Light of the Linear B tablets*. Faber & Faber.

Perono Cacciafoco, F. (2017). “Linear A and Minoan: Some New Old Questions.” In: *Annals of the University of Craiova: Series Philology, Linguistics / Analele Universității Din Craiova: Seria Științe Filologice, Linguistică*. Vol. 39. 1–2, pp. 154–170.
Perono Cacciafoco, F. and F. Cavallaro (2020). "Linear A Corpus." https://blogs.ntu.edu.sg/linear-a/.

Petrolito, T. et al. (2015). "Minoan linguistic resources: The Linear A Digital Corpus." In: *Proceedings of the 9th SIGHUM Workshop on Language Technology for Cultural Heritage, Social Sciences and Humanities (LaTeCH), Beijing, China*, pp. 95-104.

Revesez, P. (2017). "Establishing the West-Ugric Language Family with Minoan, Hattic and Hungarian by a Decipherment of Linear A." In: *WSEAS Trans. Inf. Sci. Appl.* 14, pp. 306-355.

Schoep, I. (2002). "Social and Political Organisation on Crete in the Proto-palatial Period: The case of Middle Minoan II Malia." In: *J. Mediterr. Archaeol.* 15.1, pp. 101-132.

Tan, K. M. W. Y. (2018). *The Minoan Engima: Deciphering Linear A*. Tech. rep. http://hdl.handle.net/10356/76547. Singapore.

Trask, R.L. (2008). *Etymological Dictionary of Basque*. Sussex: University of Sussex.

Verdult, R. (2015). "The (in)security of proprietary cryptography." PhD thesis. Radboud University, The Netherlands and KU Leuven, Belgium.
<figure><img src="image_127.png" /></figure>
# SigLA: The Signs of Linear A
## A Palæographical Database

Ester Salgarella · Simon Castellan

*Abstract.* We present a database of inscriptions written in the (still undeciphered) Linear A script of Bronze Age Greece. We aim at developing a systematic, exhaustive and user-friendly open access database of all Linear A inscriptions. Such a research tool is currently missing, and is essential in order to carry out statistical and palæographical analyses within the epigraphic corpus, only available in print form at the moment.

## 1. Introduction

This paper presents an interdisciplinary project blending linguistics and computer science and aiming at developing a systematic, exhaustive and user friendly open access database of all inscriptions known to date written in the Linear A script of Bronze Age Greece (ca. 1800–1450 BCE), to date still undeciphered (see § 2). Such a research tool is currently missing, and is highly desirable inasmuch as essential in order to carry out statistical and palæographical analyses within the epigraphic corpus, currently available in print form only. In fact, one of the hindrances to decipherment prospects is the current impossibility to carry out any meaningful linguistic statistical analysis and palæographic sign comparison covering the whole corpus of Linear A inscriptions due to the limited resources available. This is especially true with respect to research tools, as all material is only available in (cumbersome) print form. Collecting the Linear A inscriptions in a unified database is of paramount importance to be able to answer sophisticated palæographical and linguistic questions about the Linear A script as well as the language (Minoan) it

Ester Salgarella ID 0000-0001-5091-5311

St John's College, Cambridge, UK

E-mail: es636@cam.ac.uk

Simon Castellan ID 0000-0001-5886-5793

Inria, Univ. de Rennes, CNRS, IRISA, Rennes, France

E-mail: simon.castellan@inria.fr

Y. Haralambous (Ed.), *Grapholinguistics in the 21st Century 2020. Proceedings*
Grapholinguistics and Its Applications (ISSN: 2681-8566, e-ISSN: 2534-5192), Vol. 5.
Fluxus Editions, Brest, 2021, pp. 945–962. https://doi.org/10.36824/2020-graf-salg
ISBN: 978-2-9570549-7-8, e-ISBN: 978-2-9570549-9-2
encodes, which will help us reconstruct the socio-historical context of
the Minoan civilisation.

The database will record and display for cross-search comparison: (i) *linguistic information*: contextual occurrences of signs, their frequency and position within a tablet, as well as individual sign-sequences (i.e., words) and their relative position and frequency within the whole corpus; (ii) *palæographic variation*: the way in which particular occurrences of signs are drawn on a contextual basis, and how signs vary from inscription to inscription (intra-site analysis), and from location to location (inter-site analysis).

Emphasis will be put on allowing users to see the material evidence
(e.g., quickly see all occurrences of a sign or a word in a particular loca-
tion), in order to ease palæographic analyses that have so far been done
tediously by hand by perusing the print corpus of Linear A inscriptions
(known as GORILA (Godart and Olivier, 1976–1985), see § 2). Having
a digital approach here, where occurrences of signs can be easily com-
pared is key for carrying out comparative analysis. This is greatly sim-
plified by the use of a database, given the very little information we can
retrieve solely from the laconic textual structure of the inscriptions as
they are (characterised by a great many abbreviations which require a
context-driven interpretation of the same signs and/or sign-sequences),
as well as the overall poor evidence in terms of quantity and preserva-
tion.

In what follows, we will describe the current situation of the Lin-
ear A evidence, the state of art in the scholarship and, most crucially,
the problems we faced when trying to combine linguistic and palæo-
graphic evidence together, as well as the solutions we came up with to
develop the features of the database. A first version of the database is
available at the address https://sigla.phis.me.

2. *Ab Antiquo: The Linear A Script of Bronze Age Greece*

Linear A is a logo-syllabic writing system used in the Bronze Age (ca. 1800-1450 BCE) primarily on Crete, but also sporadically in Mainland Greece and the Aegean islands (for a concise overview of Linear A in context see esp. Decorte, 2018; Tomas, 2010a, pp. 18-25; more comprehensive studies are Davis, 2014; Salgarella, 2020; Schoep, 2002). Linear A was used by the so-called 'Minoans' to write down their language, the 'Minoan' language indigenous to Crete. Despite this broader geographical area having been Greek-speaking from around the end of the Bronze Age until today, Minoan still resists decipherment as it does not seem to be related to any of the Indo-European languages so far known (most notably Greek), nor does it to Semitic ones (spoken in the neighbouring areas, esp. Egypt and the Levant) (for a recent and thorough lin-
guistic analysis of Linear A see Davis, 2013; 2014, pp. 156–278). Hence, Linear A remains to date one of the world’s still undeciphered writing systems.

Notwithstanding, we are in a position to be able to at least ‘read’, although with an approximation, and to an extent to interpret inscriptions written in Linear A. This is because Linear A functioned as a template for the creation of Linear B, a writing system used on Crete and in Mainland Greece in the time-span ca. 1400–1190 BCE by the Greek-speaking ‘Mycenaeans’. Linear B was successfully deciphered as an early form of Greek in 1952 (for a summary of the decipherment process see esp. Chadwick, 1967; Judson, 2017; Pope, 2008). A good number of signs of this ‘Linear Script’ (on this terminology see esp. Salgarella, 2019; 2020) show the same, or a highly comparable, graphic shape and are therefore called ‘homomorphic signs’. It is argued (lastly Steele and Meissner, 2017) that some of these signs are also to be taken as ‘homophones’, i.e., having a similar phonetic value. Hence, by applying the homomorphy-homophony principle, the phonetic values we know for Linear B signs are retrospectively applied to Linear A homomorphic signs, allowing for an approximate reading of Linear A sign-sequences.

From a typological as well as functional standpoint, both Linear A and Linear B are logo-syllabic writing systems, meaning that they consist of two functional categories of signs: (i) *syllabograms*, i.e., phonetic signs representing syllables (only open syllables of the type: single Vowel, Consonant-Vowel or Consonant-Consonant-Vowel: e.g., *a*, *pa*, *nwa*); and (ii) *logograms* (or “ideograms,” on terminology see esp. Thompson, 2010), i.e., signs standing for entire words or concepts. This subdivision, however, is more marked in Linear B than it is in Linear A, where a sign can behave either way based on context. The function performed by a sign is often inferable from its position in the inscription: logograms are placed at the end of an entry (after sign-sequences interpretable as words and before numerals). Context is here of considerable help, since most Linear A inscriptions, and almost the entire corpus of Linear B texts, consist of clay documents functioning as records of economic transactions used for the bookkeeping of the Palatial administrations of Late Bronze Age Crete (and Mainland Greece for Linear B). As such, these fall into the broader category of ‘administrative documents’.

The most common type is the clay tablet, recording the flow of incoming and outgoing goods, which was used in both Linear A and Linear B administrative practice (esp. Tomas, 2006; 2010b; 2011b; 2017a,b). Moreover, each administrative system had a number of system-specific documents. These are: for Linear A, roundels (understood to have functioned as some sort of receipts), and sealings of different types (see esp. Bennet, 2008; Hallager, 1996, p. 10); for Linear B, labels, nodules and noduli (esp. Bennet, 2008, p. 17; Hallager, 2011, pp. 65–68; Tomas, 2017b). Unlike Linear B, whose use was restricted to administrative pur-
poses only, Linear A is also attested on a variety of other supports used in different contexts, falling into the general label of ‘non-administrative documents’. These inscriptions are understood to be mostly religious in nature (e.g., the ‘libation formula’, see esp. Karnava, 2016). At present the database only contains administrative documents, more precisely the Linear A tablets found at the most prominent sites on Crete. However, the long-term plan is to implement the database by adding all inscriptions recovered so far in order to make it as comprehensive and exhaustive as possible.

## 3. *Ab Initio*: Developing a New Tool

### 3.1. The Standard Corpus of Linear A Inscriptions

At this point, one may wonder, where and how are the Linear A inscriptions available to examine? The extant evidence (both administrative and non-administrative documents, on any supports) is presented in the five volumes of GORILA (Godart and Olivier, 1976–1985), published by Louis Godart and Jean-Pierre Olivier some 40 years ago. This still remains the only corpus of Linear A inscriptions, solely available in print form (although scans have recently been put online by publishers). However, more evidence has been coming up since the publication of the corpus, and has been published in individual articles (an addition to GORILA is in preparation by Del Freo and Zurbrach, 2011). As it stands, the corpus shows a black-and-white photograph of each document, followed by a drawing and two transcriptions: the first transcription is faithful to the original layout of the text (to ease sign identification in their original position on the actual document), while the second transcription shows standardised sign shapes along with a functional arrangement of the text (for easier interpretation of the record).

The corpus was a considerable achievement for the time, since it made the evidence accessible to the academic community for the first time, allowing scholars to reach an accurate and detailed interpretation of all the material since then unearthed. However, as it is, the corpus does have limitations: first, it is not intended for a wide readership, and is only accessible to those who already have a basic knowledge of Linear A given that neither a transliteration nor a transnumeration of the inscription is given, but only a transcription (Linear A signs are usually best known by their classification number, e.g., AB 60, allowing for quicker retrieval in the standardised sign list). Therefore, in order to read a text the sign shapes shown in the transcription have to be checked against the standardised list of Linear A signs (available at the beginning of Volume 5, pp. xxii-xxvii): Linear A is composed of some 180 simple signs (representing a graphic and phonologic unit); and some 164 complex (or composite) signs (which are the combination of two or
more simple signs), on top of these there are some 30 fractional signs. A quite reliable transliteration of the texts, although subjective in places, is given by Younger (2000) based on Godart and Olivier (1976–1985) transcriptions. This contribution has so far proved to be useful, especially for linguistic analyses; however, a mere transliteration leaves out palæographical information. Second, another limitation of the corpus is its very format: a printed edition does not allow to carry out any statistical and comparative analysis of signs and sign-sequences. This resulted in slowing down comparative linguistic and palæographical research (unless one painstakingly collects their own dataset). A digital approach, therefore, is clearly needed to make the most of the evidence and promote further linguistic and palæographical research, allowing for complex searches. In fact, we may want to see which variant of a sign is used on a given document, how frequent such a variant is within the whole corpus of inscriptions or within a selected set of documents (e.g., site-specific or document-type-specific analyses), which variant distribution patterns can be observed, or to simply have an overall appreciation of the palæographical features characterising the Linear A evidence coming from a given find-place.

## 3.2. A Digital Approach: Challenges and Solutions

Turning the printed corpus into a digital database raised a few challenges. The first and more important challenge is that of copyright, as the images included in the corpus are not free to use. To circumvent the copyright issues surrounding the original drawings we decided to make our own drawings of each document, based on the standard corpus of inscriptions and as faithful to the originals as possible. This long process turned out to be fruitful, as it allowed us to separate distinctly each and every sign drawn on the tablet surface, to classify each sign individually and to mark its position within the inscription. As a result, drawings can be annotated with information that would not have been possible to extract automatically for comparative purposes. As an example, our database includes for display and analysis epigraphical features such as erasures (see § 4). To make the drawing process as smooth as possible, we opted to use Krita, a graphics editor, and to turn the corpus images into multi-layered images where each sign belongs in a different layer. Basic metadata can be encoded in these files, therefore our digital corpus becomes a set of Krita files, one per document of the corpus.

Another problem we had to face during the design of the database was classifying the data. Because of the nature of evidence, there is a lot of uncertainty: uncertain readings, unknown word boundaries, uncertain function performed by signs in isolation (e.g., logograms or transaction-signs?). Moreover, the standard terminology used in the scholarship is
itself ambiguous to some extent, and part of the work of designing the database was to resolve such ambiguity. For instance, the word *sign* can refer to the standardised shape of a sign (e.g., AB 01) or to a particular occurrence of that standardised sign on a particular document, or to a graphic variant of the sign (at times difficult to recognise as such). Digitalising the corpus forced us to impose the strict inflexibility of formal languages onto the flexibility of natural languages, and forced us to make some choices in cases where the evidence is not clear.

For all these reasons, we decided to develop our own software to deal with the database. The software has two main components:

- *Import*. This component turns the corpus of Krita files into a JSON database, and produces image files for each document, and for each sign attestation.

- *Interface*. We then developed a web interface, written in OCaml and compiled in JavaScript that entirely runs in the browser. The interface allows to visualise and search the data, and is presented in § 4.

We choose this architecture to favour simplicity and openness. The database is easily accessible and usable by other people outside the interface if so they wished, and JSON is one of the best supported data description languages. Moreover, the website can be downloaded and run locally. This also ensures a very small load on the server that does not run any computation and ensures that SigLA (or copies thereof) can be easily hosted. The main trade-off is performance as this is much slower than a relational database would be. We believe this is not a problem as the evidence for Linear A is relatively small (less than two thousands documents).

One other challenge in developing the interface was to allow flexibility in the queries that can be expressed, while still remaining user-friendly and simple for the most frequent queries. For the expressiveness part, we decided to represent queries as typed $\lambda$-terms, which are functional programs, built on primitive terms representing properties of the objects manipulated by the database. For instance, types include *Word*, *Sign*, *Document*, and properties include *words*, of type *Document* → *Word List*. Using types, we built an interface allowing the user to build the $\lambda$-term incrementally by showing them the possible properties that are available at any point in the query (see § 4.2). This proved to be expressive and easy to extend by adding more primitives.

# 4. *Ad Hoc*: Main Features

## 4.1. Visualising the Data

The first feature that SigLA offers is the possibility to inspect individual documents of the corpus along with their metadata. Metadata include: find-place, document typology (clay tablet, roundel, ...) and dimensions,
density of information on the writing surface (total number of signs, total number of words). On the document displayed, individual sign occurrences are highlighted in different colours for ease of reference: when hovering with the mouse on a particular sign, information about it is displayed, such as its transnumeration (i.e., its classification number as standardly set out in Godart and Olivier, 1976–1985, Vol. V, pp. xxii-xxvii), its possible transliteration (i.e., approximate phonetic value), its function on the tablet (syllabogram, logogram, transaction-sign, fraction). Each sign is coloured according to its function: shades of blue for syllabograms (phonetic signs which are part of a word), green for logograms (more or less pictographic signs which stand for entire words or concepts), orange for fractions (fractional signs accompanying numerals), yellow for transaction signs (individual signs occurring in isolation usually on top of a tablet with a word divider on either side; see Schoep, 2002, pp. 39, 135, 140; Salgarella, 2020, pp. 50–54); and red for erasures (instances where the traces of a previously cancelled signs are still visible on the writing surface). However, at times the precise function a sign performs in a given context is unclear. In such cases, we decided to allocate the sign the function that it is most likely to perform based on context, but this choice may well be subject to revision. Moreover, we have come across a number of unclassified signs (in GORILA these are referred to with a question mark in the context where they appear and are not included in the standardised sign list), which we have labelled as such and are searchable in the database for further contextual analysis. In SigLA we use the question-mark for signs of doubtful reading or unreadable (instances where traces of a sign are visible, but the sign can not be recognised). Also in this case, all instances of unreadable signs across the whole corpus can be viewed.

The visualisation of the data as described above is displayed when viewing the document in *sign view*, illustrated in fig. 1. In addition to this setting, the document is also available in *word view*, showing coherent sign-sequences (words). Here only the syllabograms forming a word are highlighted (leaving aside logograms, transaction-signs and numerals): hovering on a sign selects the word it belongs to and clicking on such word allows the user to see other occurrences of the selected word across the corpus (and its relative position on each document for comparative purposes).

In *sign view* when clicking on the sign number, the user is redirected to the palæographical chart of the sign, which displays all occurrences of that sign across the corpus. This is one of the main goals of SigLA: to be able to compute automatically such charts, which are key to palæographical analysis and before had to be produced by hand by researchers. An example of such chart for sign AB 08 (phonetic value /a/) is displayed in fig. 2 (the figure only presents the chart relative to the site of Haghia Triada, but in SigLA all sites are available).
Document HT 23a

Switch to word view

* Site found: Haghia Triada

* Type of inscription: Tablet

* Number of signs: 30

* Number of words: 5

* Dimensions: 5.6 cm x 6.9 cm x 0.8 cm

<figure><img src="image_128.png" /></figure>

Sign #22: qa

<figure><img src="image_129.png" /></figure>

Function: syllabogram
Simple sign

<caption>FIGURE 1. A view of a document in SigLA (*sign view*)</caption>

SigLA also comes with a sign list that displays all signs occurring in the corpus, again following the accepted sign classification set out in Godart and Olivier, 1976–1985, Vol. V, pp. xxii-xxvii. However, unlike in Godart and Olivier (ibid.), the sign list of SigLA does not use a standardised (hence, somewhat abstract) shape for each sign, but rather a particular occurrence of such sign that has been considered as representative by the authors. In the case of composite signs, their decomposition into simple signs (individual constitutive components) is also displayed, following the interpretation proposed in Godart and Olivier (ibid.) and with a refined notation introduced by the first author (Salgarella, 2020, pp. 54–59).

As last remark, we also decided to add a *Map of sites* in the Homepage of SigLA, showing all sites that have yielded Linear A evidence (both administrative and non-administrative). This is a reference tool that shall help users to locate sites on Crete, as well as to evaluate at first sight the distribution of find-places on the island.

## 4.2. Searching the Database

SigLA allows users to search the corpus by providing three types of searches: (i) *sign search*: search for sign occurrences, (ii) *word search*: search for sign-sequences, (iii) *document search*: search for specific documents. SigLA supports searches of signs (simple or in composition) or words. Some examples are given below.

- *Sign search:* The sign search function allows users to look for a sign of their choosing either across the whole Linear A corpus or within a customisable subset of evidence. The end result of such search could be either palæographical charts showing all the occurrences of the
<figure><img src="image_130.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 2. Palæographical chart for sign AB 10 (/u/) in SigLA</figcaption></figure>

sign sought for in isolation for comparative purposes (as in fig. 2), or
its contextual occurrence and position on complete documents with
the occurrence of the sign highlighted. This search is of particular
importance for the evaluation of sign frequency and use across sites
and for assessing palæographical variation.

A similar search can be carried out with respect to erasures, which
are here treated as signs. It is possible to run a search for erasures in
order to assess their frequency and contextual occurrences (at times
it is possible to understand the reason that led to the cancellation of
a previously written sign). The result of such search is illustrated
in (fig. 5), showing the erasures attested on a set of documents from
Haghia Triada.

Finally, in *sign search* it is also possible to look for simple signs in com-
bination: more precisely, for all attestations of a simple sign when
in combination with other ones to produce composite signs (in Lin-
ear A a simple sign can be combined with multiple others). By way of example, let us take simple sign A 302 (ʔ): by using the nomenclature A 302+ in the sign search box and running a search, we can view all attestations of composite signs having A 302 as one of their constitutive components (fig. 4).

- **Word search**: Let us assume we wanted to view all attestations of the word *ku-ro* (understood to mean ‘total’) within the Linear A corpus. By running a word search we end up seeing all contextual occurrences of *ku-ro*, as illustrated in fig. 3, showing all attestations on the documents from Haghia Triada (but in the database all sites are displayed). This viewing setting is also useful to carry out comparative analysis of the position of the same sign-sequence over different documents so as to get insights into the meaning of Linear A words (our knowing the meaning of *ku-ro* is more of an exception than the rule).

- **Document search**: The document search option allows to look for a particular document or a set of documents (customisable by the user) within the whole corpus or within a given site (or a selected combination of multiple sites). It is also possible to narrow down the search to a specific document type (e.g., tablet, roundel, label, etc.) so as to evaluate its frequency and distribution across sites. The end result of this search is the viewing of entire documents, which are displayed without additional highlight on specific features. Given that the metadata included in SigLA also contain information about document dimensions, this search allows to see and evaluate at first sight the relative proportions and sizes of all the documents within the corpus, allowing for comparative analysis of their sizes (as well as some pinacological features).

- **Quick search**: Finally, for easier searches, a quick search option is also available (displayed on the top bar), which can be used to quickly jump to a particular document (e.g., HT 12), sign (e.g., AB 60), or location (e.g., Knossos), without engaging with any of the aforementioned search interfaces.

These simple searches offer already a lot of improvement on the print corpus of Linear A inscriptions. However, as explained in §3.2, SigLA also offers a number of more complex and advanced searches. Such searches are done by supplying a list of criteria that must all be met by the objects sought after. Such criteria are expressed using properties of the objects and can be quite sophisticated. In fig. 8, we show how one would enter the query “Search for documents in Haghia Triada that have a word of length greater than five”. This search has two criteria (location and existence of such a word). The search query is composed interactively, and the user is guided at each step by viewing what are the possible properties they can use in the query: fig. 6 and fig. 7 depict the steps in this interactive process, where at each step we are offered the list of possible properties to use. The first step (fig. 6) is to select the
<figure><img src="image_131.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 3. Sign search: Attestations of *ku-ro* at Haghia Triada</figcaption></figure>

condition on documents *Contains one word satisfying*. The second step is to specify which words we are interested in, i.e., specify a predicate on words. Hence we have access to a different set of blocks, including *Word length* which is what we want (fig. 7). The third step is to specify that we want the length to be *greater than* a specific number, here five (fig. 8).

As also shown in fig. 8, results can be grouped and sorted in arbitrary ways, the default option being to sort them by site. Groups can also be nested (for instance to group results by site, and to group the result within each site by document).
<figure><img src="image_132.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 4. Attestations of complex signs containing A 302</figcaption></figure>

## 5. *Ad Maiora*: Future Improvements

As it stands, the database is still under construction, although all the main features have already been developed in this first version. We are currently working towards implementing the database with a number of additional features, described in what follows.

In order to ease reading and interpretation of the Linear A documents displayed in the database, we are planning on adding a full transliteration of each inscription by using (approximate) phonetic values (based on comparison with Linear B, see discussion in § 2). At present such transliterations have only been made available by John Younger in his website 'Linear A Texts and Inscriptions in Phonetic Transcription and Commentary' (Younger, 2000). Younger's transliterations are based on Go-dart and Olivier (1976-1985), and are often improved with his own readings. However, Younger's website is mostly concerned with Linear A texts, much less so with the physical appearance of documents. Hence, palæographical features are not displayed. We hope that in this respect SigLA will complement, as well as integrate, Younger's work. In addition to the phonetic transliteration of Linear A inscriptions, we would also like to show a further transcription in Unicode characters. This feature may be of particular use to those who are less familiar with Linear A signs and their palæographical variation. In fact, Unicode characters reflect the standardised shapes of signs (and combinations thereof) as listed in ibid., Vol. V, pp. xxii-xxvii), and will ease legibility of the original inscription as preserved on the document surface. Adding this information will enhance clarity of reading and interpretation, as users will be able to recognise at first sight which signs are shown on a given document and to ap-
<figure><img src="image_133.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 5. Erasures at Khania</figcaption></figure>

preciate their palæographical variation as contextual occurrences. In this
respect, SigLA presents itself as a didactic tool.

Another useful implementation will be the addition of a section for
notes or comments after each document. This section shall accommo-
date information that will ease interpretation of inscriptions and texts,
given that in most cases this process is problematic to say the least (due
to the fragmentary state of preservation of a good many documents, our
imprecise knowledge of the meaning of sign-sequences as well as the low
frequency of cross-site sign-sequences, the multifunctionality of signs
based on context, etc.). In this way, users will be guided to make sense
of the texts and transcriptions as they appear by using their own judg-
ment. Moreover, whenever possible, references will be made to individ-
ual studies dedicated to each document displayed or of interest for its
interpretation. In fact, at present there is no 'Handbook' of Linear A,
where to learn all the basics to interpret an inscription and situate it in
its broader archaeological and historical context.

The addition of photographs of original documents remains a most
cherished desideratum for the time being, as contingent upon copyright
## Document Search

<figure><img src="image_134.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 6. Properties for document</figcaption></figure>

## Document Search

<figure><img src="image_135.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 7. Properties for words</figcaption></figure>

permissions. We wish SigLA (or any alternative similar database) will one day host high-resolution (ideally 3D) images of Linear A documents for more thorough and accurate first-hand inspection of the documents' palæographical and pinacological features.
<figure><img src="image_136.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 8. Example of a complex document search</figcaption></figure>

## 6. *Ad Aeterna*: New Research Pathways

To conclude, we would like to pinpoint some of the potential applications and future pathways of research SigLA will allow.

First, it shall be possible to refine the Linear A sign repertory, by being able to clearly differentiate between signs and their variants and at the same time reaching a better global understanding of the structural characteristics of the writing system. This will ultimately lead to the appreciation of how many signs do represent the core of the writing system (in this respect see also Salgarella, in preparation).

Second, SigLA shall allow to carry out systematic research into scribal activity, resulting in a more thorough and reliable identification of scribal hands, at present still not clearly identified nor identifiable (in Godart and Olivier, 1976–1985, Vol. V, pp. 83–113, Godart put forward possible scribal hand attributions, but without explaining the reasons of his choices; on scribal hand identification see esp. Militello, 1989; Raison and Pope, 1971; Tomas, 2011a), as well as getting an idea of the overall number of scribes at work at a given site. By consequence, we should also be able to come to identify possible scribal/writing ‘traditions’ and their spread across time and space. This, in turn, will allow to throw light on matters pertaining to the acquisition and transmission of the writing system as well as writing practice, enabling us to assess the extent of literacy and the level of specialisation in writing and administrative practices in Minoan Crete. These are highly debated questions that scholars have already been addressing, exploring and trying to answer
with respect to Linear B. However, we are severely lagging behind with
respect to Linear A.

Third, in the long term the database will also display information
about the physical appearance and manufacture of the Linear A docu-
ments included, such as erasures (already searchable on SigLA), pres-
ence or absence of ruling lines to guide writing, presence of word-
dividers, density of writing on the writing surface as well as textual
arrangement, size comparison, presence of cuttings (if a tablet was cut
after being inscribed). All this data will give us key information about
the tablet manufacture process as well as the editing of the text itself.

Last but not the least, all these features, taken all together, shall en-
able us to carry out a more sophisticated and thorough palæographical
comparison for the evaluation of (the degree of) palæographical simi-
larities and differences both across sites and within a site, with the pos-
sibility for each and every user to narrow down their analysis to specific
features by customising their own dataset based on their very own re-
search interests.

This unique research tool, and the ensuing pathways it shall enable,
will help shed light on all above areas of investigation, which are still
terra incognita to a great extent. The database, in fact, shall allow us to
make the most of the existing evidence, to overcome the limits set by
traditional print corpora and to push combinatory linguistic and palæo-
graphical research a step further. It is our hope that SigLA will make
a significant contribution to the field by proving a useful open-access
interactive tool allowing researchers more accurately to look into the
palæographical, epigraphic, pinacological, as well as linguistic features
of the Linear A writing system of Bronze Age Crete. Progress and ad-
vancement in these areas will be a major achievement for the study of
the Linear A script, the Minoan language, and the cultural backdrop
within which the civilisation inhabiting Crete and the Aegean islands
flourished in the Late Bronze Age.

References

Bennet, John (2008). "Now You See It; Now You Don't! The disappearance of the Linear A script on Crete." In: *The Disappearance of Writing Systems: Perspectives on Literacy and Communication*. Ed. by John Baines, John Bennet, and Stephen Houston. Sheffield: Equinox Publishing, pp. 1-29.

Chadwick, John (1967). *The Decipherment of Linear B*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davis, Brent (2013). "Syntax in Linear A: The Word-Order of the 'Libation Formula'." In: *Kadmos* 52.1, pp. 35-52.
——— (2014). *Minoan Stone Vessels with Linear A Inscriptions*. Leuven: Peeters.

Decorte, Roeland P.-J. E. (2018). "The Origins of Bronze Age Aegean Writing: Linear A, Cretan Hieroglyphic and A New Proposed Pathway of Script Formation." In: *Paths Into Script Formation in the Ancient Mediterranean*. Ed. by Silvia Ferrara and Miguel Valério. Studi Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici, Nuova Serie, Supplemento 1, pp. 13–50.

Del Freo, Maurizio and Julien Zurbrach (2011). "La préparation d'un supplément au *Recueil des inscriptions en linéaire A*. Observations à partir d'un travail en cours." In: *Bulletin de correspondance bellénique* 1.135, pp. 73–97.

Godart, Louis and Jean-Pierre Olivier (1976–1985). *Recueil des inscriptions en linéaire A*. Vol. I-V. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.

Hallager, Erik (1996). *The Minoan Roundel and other Sealed Documents in the Neopalatial Linear A Administration*. Vol. 14. Aegaeum. Liège/Austin: Université de Liège/University of Texas.

——— (2011). "On the origin of Linear B administration." In: *Πεπραγμένα Ι΄ Διεθνοῦς Κρητολογικοῦ Συνεδρίου 2006 [Proceedings of the 10th Cre-tological Conference 2006]*]. Ed. by Maria Andreadaki-Vlasaki [Μαρία Άνδρεαδάκη-Βλαζάκη] and Eleni Papadopoulou [Ελένη Παπαδοπούλου]. Vol. Α1. Χανιά [Chania]: Φιλολογικός Σύλλογος «Ο Χρυσόστομος» [Literary Society "Chryssostomos"], pp. 317–239.

Judson, Anna (2017). "The decipherment: people, process, challenges." In: *Codebreakers & Groundbreakers*. Ed. by Anastasia Christophilopoulou, Yannis Galanakis, and James Grime. Catalogue of exhibition held Oct. 2017–Feb. 2018. Cambridge: Charlesworth Press, pp. 15–29.

Karnava, Artemis (2016). "On Sacred Vocabulary and Religious Dedica-tions: The Minoan 'Libation Formula'." In: *Metaphysis: Ritual, Myth and Symbolism in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the 15th International Aegean Conference, Vienna, Institute for Oriental and European Archaeology, Aegean and Anatolia Department, Austrian Academy of Sciences and Institute of Classical Ar-chaeology, University of Vienna, 22-25 April 2014*. Ed. by Eva Alram-Stern et al. Vol. 39. Aegaem. Leuven-Liège: Peeters, pp. 345–355.

Militello, Pietro (1989). "Gli scribi di Haghia Triada." In: *La Parola del Passato* 44 (2), pp. 126–147.

Pope, Maurice (2008). "The Decipherment of Linear B." In: *A Companion to Linear B: Mycenaean Greek Texts and their World*. Ed. by Yves Duhoux and Anna Murpurgo Davies. Vol. 1. Leuven: Peeters, pp. 1–23.

Raison, Jacques and Maurice Pope (1971). *Index du Linéaire A*. Vol. 41. In-cunabula Graeca. Roma: Edizioni dell'Ateneo.

Salgarella, Ester (2019). "Drawing lines: The palaeography of Linear A and Linear B." In: *Kadmos* 58.1–2, pp. 61–92.

——— (2020). *Aegean Linear Scripts: Rethinking the relationship between Lin-ear A and Linear B*. Cambridge Classical Studies. Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press.
Salgarella, Ester (in preparation). “Mix and Match: A combinatory (re-)classification of Linear A signs.”

Schoep, Ilse (2002). *The Administration of Neopalatial Crete. A Critical Assessment of the Linear A Tablets and their Role in the Administrative Process*. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.

Steele, Philippa M. and Torsten Meissner (2017). “From Linear B to Linear A: The problem of the backward projection of sound values.” In: *Understanding relations between scripts: the Aegean writing systems*. Ed. by Philippa M. Steele. Oxford/Philadelphia: Oxbow Books, pp. 93–110.

Thompson, Rupert (2010). “In defence of ideograms.” In: *Études mycénientes 2010: Actes du XIIIᵉ colloque international sur les textes égéens*. Ed. by Pierre Carlier et al. Vol. 10. Biblioteca di Pasiphae. Pisa and Roma: Fabrizio Serra, pp. 545–561.

Tomas, Helena (2006). “Comparing Linear A and Linear B Administrative Systems: The Case of the Roundel and the Elongated Tablet.” In: *Colloquium Romanum: atti del XII colloquio internazionale di micenologia*. Ed. by A. Sacconi et al. Vol. 2. Biblioteca di Pasiphae, pp. 767–774.

——— (2010a). “Cretan Hieroglyphic and Linear A.” In: *The Oxford Handbook of the Bronze Age Aegean (ca. 3000–1000 BC)*. Ed. by Eric H. Cline. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 340–355.

——— (2010b). “The story of the Aegean tablet: Cretan Hieroglyphic, Linear A, Linear B.” In: *Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies* 53 (2), pp. 133–134.

——— (2011a). “Linear A Scribes and Their Writings Styles.” In: *Pasiphae: rivista di filologia e antichità egee* 5, pp. 35–58.

——— (2011b). “Linear A tablet ≠ Linear B tablet.” In: *Πεπραγμένα Ι' Διεθνοῦς Κρητολογικοῦ Συνεδρίου 2006 [Proceedings of the 10th Cretological Conference 2006]*. Ed. by Maria Andreadaki-Vlasaki [Μαρία Άνδρεαδάκη-Βλαζάκη] and Eleni Papadopoulou [Ελένη Παπαδοπούλου]. Vol. Α1. Χανιά [Chania]: Φιλολογικὸς Σύλλογος «Ο Χρυσόστομος» [Literary Society “Chryssostomos”], pp. 331–343.

——— (2017a). “From Minoan to Mycenaean elongated tablets: defining the shape of Aegean tablets, Aegean Scripts.” In: *Proceedings of the 14th International Colloquium on Mycenaean Studies, Copenhagen, 2–5 September 2015*. Ed. by Marie-Louise Nosch and Hedvig Landenius Enegren. Vol. 1. Roma: Istituto di Studi sul Mediterraneo Antico, pp. 115–126.

——— (2017b). “Linear B script and Linear B administrative system—different patterns in their development.” In: *Understanding relations between scripts: the Aegean writing systems*. Ed. by Philippa M. Steele. Oxford/Philadelphia: Oxbow Books, pp. 57–68.

Younger, John (2000). “Linear A Texts and Inscriptions in Phonetic Transcription.” URL: http://people.ku.edu/~jyounger/LinearA/.
# Digitising Swahili in Arabic Script
With *Andika!*

Kevin Donnelly

*Abstract.* In order for traditional culture, as reflected in manuscripts, to make the transition to the digital age, there is a need to use modern technology to make them available. This means more than simply making scans of the manuscripts—it means storing the manuscripts in a digital format which will allow them to be searched, to have concordances and frequency lists compiled, and so on. Where the script used for the traditional material is the same as the current script, this may present few difficulties, but in cases where the traditional material uses a script that is no longer used for the language, this may present difficulties. This paper presents free (GPL3) tools to address these issues for the Swahili language of East Africa (though the general principles are applicable elsewhere), so that heritage material written in a displaced (Arabic) script (S1) can be easily converted to digital form and automatically transliterated to the contemporary (Roman) script (S2).

## 1. Introduction

This paper addresses ways in which cultural material in a displaced script can be transitioned to the modern digital age. The paper is in three parts.

- The reasons why digitising the *actual text* (as opposed to providing only scans or transcriptions) is essential.

- Tools to do this for Swahili in Arabic script.

- The multitude of ways in which manuscript poetry digitised in this way can be presented.

Kevin Donnelly

<figure><img src="image_137.png" /></figure>

0000-0002-0871-6180

Independent researcher, 7 Ty'n Cae, Llanfairpwll, Ynys Môn, Wales, LL61 6UX, UK

kevin@dotmon.com

Y. Haralambous (Ed.), *Grapholinguistics in the 21st Century 2020. Proceedings*

Grapholinguistics and Its Applications (ISSN: 2681-8566, e-ISSN: 2534-5192), Vol. 5.

Fluxus Editions, Brest, 2021, pp. 963–984. https://doi.org/10.36824/2020-graf-donn

ISBN: 978-2-9570549-7-8, e-ISBN: 978-2-9570549-9-2
2. Why Do We Need “Full” Digitisation?

2.1. Script Displacement

The loss of cultural capital due to language displacement is now well-
recognised,<fnref n="1" /> but a similar loss is caused by script displacement.

In many parts of the world, the scripts formerly used to write par-
ticular languages have been superseded by other scripts. This is espe-
cially the case for African languages such as Swahili, where over the last
century the Roman script has displaced the Arabic script formerly used
by literate individuals on the East African coast. Adapting the well-
established usage of L1 and L2 to denote "first language" and "second
language," we might refer to Swahili in Arabic script as S1, and to Swahili
in Roman script as S2.<fnref n="2" />

When historical scripts (S1) are displaced by newer scripts (S2), ei-
ther as a result of past colonial policies or more recent national policies
enforcing orthographic change, a phenomenon of progressive "S1 de-
literacy" may occur. This can be defined as a situation where modern-
day speakers (especially younger ones) are increasingly unable to read
documents that may encode significant amounts of cultural heritage. A
wealth of traditional linguistic and cultural material (e.g., poetry, histo-
ries, religious tracts) may therefore become increasingly inaccessible to
speakers of that language.

Script displacement receives less attention than language displace-
ment, perhaps because it is assumed that S1 cultural material can be
conserved via digital scanning of the manuscript, or by creating a dig-
ital transliteration (more or less phonetic as the case may be) into S2.
However, there are issues with both of these.

2.2. Digital Scans

Digital scans are just so many pictures—they cannot be searched un-
less they are transcribed. You can change the resolution of the scan on-
screen, you can move the page around, you can leaf through the docu-
ment, but that’s about it. They are a great resource for librarians and
archivists, in that they allow easier access to manuscripts considered
as objects, but they have limited value to scholars of history, language
or literature who may be more interested in the content, because they
lack the scope for unpacking that content rather than simply looking

<footnote n="1">1. eldp.net, endangeredlanguages.com</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2. This usage could of course be extended if the language involved has ever been
written in more than two scripts.</footnote>
at it. Moreover, their large size makes them difficult to transfer, especially where internet access is limited, and frustratingly slow to navigate through, particularly on older computers.

These problems can to some extent be resolved by converting S1 scans to pdf and enriching them with additional text layers, as Thilo Schadeberg and Ridder Samsom have done for Sacleux (1939). However, selection of text on such pdfs can be haphazard. Moreover, if you add a text layer, which transcription does it use? Standard (modern), or that used in the manuscript? Or both (one text layer for each)? It is also difficult to do any sort of computer-based analysis (eg list all words occurring at the end of a line of poetry), unless you work solely on the text layer. Arguments for creating a text layer are in effect arguments for a stand-alone digitisation.

Another option with digital scans is to create an interface to them that allows annotations to be made on the image, but this raises questions about how should such annotations should be stored, whether they should be an adjunct to the scan or somehow integrated with it, and how they might be searched and compared.

Where S1 has been maintained, another option is to provide an S1 digital version of the text alongside the S1 scan.<fnref n="3" /> Sometimes the scan is omitted in favour of a close (diplomatic) S1 transcription of the manuscript, with the interface allowing round-tripping between the transcription and the manuscript.<fnref n="4" /> It is at this point that the text leaps, as it were, off the page and into the computer, out of the past and into the present or future—we have the potential to handle the text in the way we handle a modern computer-generated document, but it is still grounded in the original manuscript.

## 2.3. Transcription Only

Close S1 transcription for S1 originals requires the conventions used in the transfer from page to screen to be defined in detail. But where we have an S1 original and an S2 transliteration, this is even more important. This goes beyond the transliterations of individual letters (e.g., to transliterate the Arabic letter *khab* ḫ and *shin* ש, German scholars prefer *ḥb* and *š* respectively, while English scholars prefer *kb* and *sh*). More substantively, it raises questions such as:

- How much silent emendation of the text has been done?

- Have sections of the text been omitted, and why?

- Have ambiguous readings been flagged, or simply ignored?

<footnote n="3">3. ctext.org, beowulf.uky.edu</footnote>

<footnote n="4">4. rhyddiaithganoloesol.caerdydd.ac.uk, chaucermss.org</footnote>
As a thought-experiment, consider whether any linguist, literary scholar, or historian would seriously suggest studying Chinese, Greek, Arabic, Egyptian hieroglyphic texts solely via transliteration. S2 transliteration involves decisions that make the transcriber perforce an editor whose decisions the reader must take on trust. In the case of Swahili, we have in the past often ended up with what looks like an overly "tidy" text, with all lines exactly fitting the metre, all rhymes perfect, and so on. A transliteration-only approach not only wrenches the contents from the context in which they were written, it devalues S1 further, and it balkanises the material (it is scattered over various publications, may use a variety of transliterations, may reflect more or less standardisation, and so on).

It might be argued that combining both of the above methods, by presenting an S2 transliteration alongside an S1 scan, is a viable solution to the shortcomings identified. But this solution is only a partial remedy, because it decouples the medium from the message, losing part of what makes the material a cultural resource. The S1 scan now stands apart from the S2 text, and needs to be periodically reintegrated with it for reading purposes.

In fact, however valuable, all these options (S1 scan alone, S2 transliteration alone, S1 scan + S2 transliteration) tend to suggest that S1 belongs to the past, and has little to contribute to the modern culture. Moreover, a judgement is being made on the "value" of the language, such that peripheral languages (minority languages either in terms of the number of speakers or the political "heft" of those speakers) get downgraded. The implication is that some languages do not "deserve" the resources available to others. As noted above, how many scholars would consider studying Chinese or Arabic solely in Roman transliteration?

## 2.4. Full Digitisation

In the past, scans were expensive and impractical. Transcription, with all its shortcomings and value judgements, was therefore seen as the only viable option, even if it was "lossy" when compared with the original manuscript. This is no longer the case: most mobile phones can take high-quality photos, and the ongoing expansion of the Unicode encoding standard<fnref n="5" /> makes it possible for virtually any script to be represented by modern computers. There are therefore few reasons nowadays for not producing "full" digitisations (where the text can be fully processed by a computer to allow searches, the creation of wordlists and so on), backing them up where possible with photographs of the manuscript.

<footnote n="5">5. home.unicode.org</footnote>
This cultural material can then transition fully to the modern, digital world, instead of being viewed as an “object” in a museum collection.

The next section of the paper looks at tools which enable this for S1 Swahili (Swahili in Arabic script). The tools are called *Andika!* , the Swahili word for “write!,” which often occurs at the beginning of a poem as a command to the scribe to take up his pen and write down the words of the poem.<fnref n="6" /> The general principles behind the toolset can be applied to any language where script displacement is an issue.

3. A Toolset to Digitise S1 Swahili

3.1. Swahili

Swahili is possibly the most widely-spoken Bantu language, in terms of both geographical area and number of speakers. It is widely used as L2 by some 90m people in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and the DRC, but it is spoken as L1 by perhaps only 2m people (Hinnebusch, 2003) on the East African coast, from Brava in Somalia down to the Comoro Islands off the coast of Mozambique.

The location of the Swahili meant that they became part of the In-
dian Ocean trading networks from an early period, and in turn this
led to their becoming Islamised. The spread of literacy based on the
Arabic script led to the writing of their own language in that script,
and Swahili has the longest written heritage of any sub-Saharan African
language—poetry survives from the late 1600s onwards (Knappert, 1967;
1972; 1982). The greatest flowering of “classical” Swahili literature was
in the 1800s, when poets played a role in many of the “city-states” along
the coast (Lamu, Pate, Mombasa, Zanzibar, etc). In the late 1800s Eu-
ropean missionaries produced Christian material in Arabic script, but
under the British colonial administration the language was “standard-
ised” in a Roman orthography from the 1930s on, and since then the use
of Arabic script has declined drastically. That does not mean, however,
that S1 Swahili has disappeared—it is still used extensively in religious
contexts (e.g., mosque schools), and in particular areas. For instance,
Ottenheimer (2012, p. 2) notes that “Arabic script is widely used for
Shinzwani [a Swahili dialect in the Comoro Islands], with a literacy rate
over 90%”.

A wide variety of Swahili poetry in different metres has been pub-
lished, from religious meditations to ballads to love-songs, but there is
also a body of prose work that has been less frequently published. Much

<footnote n="6">6. The tools are available under a free (GPL3) license at [kevindonnelly.org.uk/](http://kevindonnelly.org.uk/)swahili. The site also includes a manual, and a converter to round-trip between S1 and S2 Swahili—see 3.5 below.</footnote>
of this S1 material exists in manuscripts, either originals or copies of originals, in Western libraries, and this is probably only a fraction of the extant total—manuscripts are handed down through the generations as family heirlooms.

At present, the only viable way of preserving these S1 (Arabic script) manuscripts is to scan them, or to transcribe them into S2 (Roman script), because the tools available to handle S1 Swahili are limited. Although a word-processor can be set up to use Arabic script, most Arabic fonts do not contain all the glyphs (e.g., ḫ/p/, ng̈/ŋ/) necessary to write Swahili.<fnref n="7" /> An additional factor is that the standard Arabic keyboard has a different layout from the standard English (US or UK) keyboard, so using an English keyboard to type Arabic, or vice versa, means trying to mentally translate between the two layouts.

Modern computing platforms give us a viable way to address these issues relatively easily, so that we can type S1 Swahili directly into a computer.

## 3.2. Characters for Swahili Sounds

The Unicode Consortium, formed in 1991, has the goal of “support[ing] the writing systems used by all the world’s languages [by] provid[ing] a unique code for every character, in every language, in every program, on every platform.”<fnref n="8" /> As of March 2020, the Unicode Standard encompasses 154 scripts and over 143,000 characters,<fnref n="9" /> meaning that a great many characters from Arabic-based scripts are covered.<fnref n="10" /> However, even if a character has been recognised in Unicode, it does not follow that computer fonts will contain that character, and this is the case for most Arabic fonts, which do not contain all the characters necessary to write Swahili.<fnref n="11" /> The most commonly missing sounds, with the *Andika!* character, for them are set out in Table 1.<fnref n="12" />

<footnote n="7">7. In earlier times, scribes dealt with this deficiency either by using a character that represented a similar sound, or borrowing a character from another Arabic-script language that had a similar sound. So /p/ might be represented by Arabic ḫ/b/ or Persian ḫ/p/.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">8. home.unicode.org/basic-info/overview</footnote>

<footnote n="9">9. unicode.org/versions/\index{Unicode}Unicode13.0.0</footnote>

<footnote n="10">10. unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0600.pdf</footnote>

<footnote n="11">11. ISESCO (Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) has proposed a standard Arabic script that would cater for all African languages (Chtatou, 2010), but this tends to ignore local writing traditions (Warren-Rothlin, 2014)—for example, the proposed vowel for e seems to be used only in Fulfulde.</footnote>

<footnote n="12">12. The last three are for representation of northern dialects.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_138.png" /><figcaption>TABLE 1. Swahili characters missing from most Arabic fonts</figcaption></figure>

In such a case, there are then two options. One is to add that character to the desired font using a font editor.<fnref n="13" /> But the simpler option is to use a comprehensive Arabic font that contains that character. *Andika!* uses SIL's Scheherazade font.<fnref n="14" /> One important point is that since S1 Swahili is usually vocalised, it is best to avoid fonts which use Arabic ligations extensively, since these can cause problems with placement of the vowel signs. Even a font like Scheherazade, though, is still missing characters used by some scribes (e.g., *noon with teh above*, as used in Chimwiini in the most northerly part of the Swahili littoral). In that case, the most workable option in the short term is to add the character by hand using a font editor, and seek in the longer term to have the codepoint added to the Unicode Standard, and then to the font.

### 3.3. Accessing the Characters

Having chosen a font which contains all the characters needed to represent Swahili, the next requirement is a way to access those characters via the computer keyboard. Since the standard Arabic keyboard has a different layout from the standard English (US or UK) keyboard, switching between them means memorising different keys for the same sounds for each script. For example, *t* is on the top row under the left hand on an English keyboard, but *teb t* is in the middle row under the right hand on an Arabic keyboard.

To avoid this, *Andika!* uses a key layout for the Arabic characters (Figure 1) that maps to the layout of the English keyboard, meaning that typists can leverage what they already know from typing S2 standard Swahili. The characters are grouped as logically as possible, using either sound or character likeness. For instance, *sukun* is on the full stop key, and short vowels, long vowels, and vowel carriers are all on the same key. Related Arabic characters are mostly on the same keys as the English characters. For instance (Figure 2), *dal d* is on the *D* key, *dhal d* is accessed using *Shift+D*, and *dad d* using *AltGr+D*. A character representation

<footnote n="13">13. designwithfontforge.com/en-US/Adding_Glyphs_to_an_
Font.html If there is not already a Unicode codepoint for that character, a codepoint in a Private Use Area can be used: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Use_Areas.</footnote>

<footnote n="14">14. software.sil.org/scheherazade. Other possibilities are Khaled Hosny's Amiri font and the PakType fonts.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_139.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 1. The Swahili keyboard layout in Andika!</figcaption></figure>

sending the alveolar *d* as used in Mombasa, *dal with tah above ڤ*, borrowed from Urdu, can be accessed using *AltGr+Shift+D*.

<figure><img src="image_140.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 2. Character cluster on the *D* key</figcaption></figure>

The result is that S1 (Arabic) Swahili can be typed as quickly and easily as S2 (Roman) Swahili, and on the same keyboard. The same approach could be used for any language to map S1 characters to the relevant S2 keyboard.

## 3.4. Using S1 Swahili

Now that we have a means of representing Swahili in Arabic script, two forms of use are possible: using it to write contemporary Swahili, and using it to replicate historical Swahili manuscripts in a digital format. The remainder of this section discusses the first use-case, and the next section discusses the second.

Before that, it may be worth emphasising that Arabic script is just as capable as Roman script at representing any language. There are no purely linguistic or graphemic reasons for favouring Roman script over Arabic script for the representation of Swahili: the fact that Swahili is overwhelmingly written in Roman script is due purely to political and historical developments, and not to any shortcoming in the Arabic script. As the British Library's Endangered Archives Programme
says, “Ajami, the modified Arabic scripts used in writing African lan-
guages, have been deeply embedded in the history and culture of many
Islamized societies of Africa,”<fnref n="15" /> and Mumin (2014, p. 44) notes that the
use of Arabic script has been attested for at least 80 African languages.
As with Roman, Cyrillic and other scripts, Arabic script has added ad-
ditional characters or diacritics when necessary to cater for languages
as different as Persian, Turkish, Kurdish, Pashto, Urdu, Malay, Hausa,
etc., as Warren-Rothlin (2014, 269ff) points out. In light of this, com-
ments about “the incongruence between Swahili and Arabic and the re-
sulting incompatibility of the Arabic script to write Swahili” (Vierke,
2014, p. 326) are misleading, and indeed seem to be a manifestation of
the point made in the introduction about S1 being seen as belonging to
the past.

The script itself is not the problem. Rather, its usage has been hampered by a lack of standardisation, where writing conventions tended to be ad hoc responses to recording speech (for a similar issue in West Africa, see Warren-Rothlin (2014, 269ff)). S2 is more likely to have such conventions than S1, given that in many cases S2 may have been expressly designed to handle the language, perhaps via a committee, whereas S1 is more likely to have been progressively developed and adapted over a period of time by individuals unable to do anything but promote good practice as they see it.

This issue of standardised spelling is relevant when discussing con-
temporary use of S1 Swahili. Although S2 Swahili is now the standard
used by millions of speakers, and that will not change, the ability to use
S1 may be useful in domains (e.g., mosque schools) where that script
is still used, or in places (e.g., the Comoros) where S1 literacy is still
high. The key point is to allow the *option* of using S1 for cultural her-
itage purposes. A key practical issue for contemporary use, however,
is avoiding the additional work involved in typing the text twice, once
in each script. Preferably, it should be possible to get either S1 or S2
“for free” from the other, meaning that the same text can be created in
either script, and converted to the other as required This also provides
an easy way of increasing the amount of modern S1 text available, for
instance, by converting S2 webpages or other documents to S1. Cru-
cially, however, conversion is only possible if both scripts use standard-
ised spelling.

Since there is currently no standard for S1 Swahili spelling, *Andika!*
uses the proposed system set out in Omar and Frankl (1997).<fnref n="16" /> Com-
bined with the keyboard layout described above, this means that text

<footnote n="15">15. eap.bl.uk/project/EAP1042</footnote>

<footnote n="16">16. Some slight modifications have been made. For instance, the authors suggest rules for omitting short vowels, but it is actually quicker to type them, and this also simplifies conversion.</footnote>
can be typed into a word-processor at around the same speed in either script using almost exactly the same keys (Figure 3)—the only difference is the need to type a capital letter to get a long vowel in the penultimate syllable in S1.

<figure><img src="image_141.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 3. Typing S1 Swahili</figcaption></figure>

### 3.5. Converting Between S1 and S2

In the S1 → S2 direction (Figure 4), S1 is converted first to a Romanised abstraction, and then converted to a standard S2 transliteration.

The reason for the intermediate abstraction is to offer scope for multiple transliterations. For instance, when dealing with older manuscripts (see 4.2 below) we may wish to have a close transliteration of the Arabic script as well as a standard transliteration. Alternatively, it may be appropriate to replace a standard transliteration with one that reflects dialectal features. For instance, if a scribe has written ذیہا, dhīcha, the equivalent in the northern Bajuni dialect to standard Swahili vita, ‘war’, a transliteration such as zit/a might be preferred, in order to come as close as possible to standard S1 while giving an indication of the dialectal pronunciation.<fnref n="17" /> Another option would be to add a transliteration for Arabic, to handle bilingual Arabic/Swahili text (e.g., Qasida Hamziyya poems—see 4.2 below). Currently, Arabic text is transliterated using the close transliteration conventions for Swahili, and some features of the Arabic language are not optimally handled in this.

In the S2 → S1 direction, no intermediate abstraction is currently used, because there is only output at present—the proposed standard spelling in Omar and Frankl (1997). Nevertheless, the same approach could be used, so that different S1 spellings are supported.

Virtually no editing is required in either direction, with the exception that in S1 → S2 capital letters need to be added where appropriate, since Arabic has no concept of capital letters. The website<fnref n="18" /> gives an example of a browser-based frontend to the converter code, where text can be copied and pasted into a box, and converted to the other script.

<footnote n="17">17. *zi-* is a northern variant of the standard class 8 marker *vi-*.</footnote>

<footnote n="18">18. *kevindonnelly.org.uk/swahili*</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_142.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 4. Conversion from S1 to S2</figcaption></figure>

## 4. Digitising Heritage Manuscripts

With tools in place to type S1 Swahili into a computer, and to convert it to a variety of S2 Swahili transliterations, we now have a means of digitising S1 manuscripts, particularly those containing traditional poetry. This section demonstrates replicating the content of the manuscript in digital form, and gives examples of various types of enriched output.

The digitisation of heritage manuscripts has additional requirements compared to the digitisation of contemporary texts. For instance, we may want to reflect the layout on the physical page, or add alternate readings, or draw attention to scribal errors, or add contextual or etymological notes on individual words, or add a translation. Likewise, we are almost certain to need a list of the words in the manuscripts, so that concordances, indexes or other editorial matter can be prepared. The solution proposed by *Andika!* is to insert each word of the manuscript text into a database, so that additional material like this can be added at word-level. Subsets of the material can then be retrieved from the database as required, in whatever format is appropriate.

### 4.1. The Digitisation Process

A key difference between traditional transliteration and the *Andika!* approach is that the process begins with typing out the manuscript itself instead of typing out a transliteration of the manuscript. The latter step is not required, because the transliteration (indeed, several transliterations—see 3.5) can be generated automatically from the re-typed manuscripts. The process is summarised in Figure 5.
<figure><img src="image_143.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 5. Digitisation process for S1 manuscripts</figcaption></figure>

In Step 1, the manuscript is typed out as if it were a piece of con-
temporary text, but instead of trying to follow a spelling standard, we
type only what the scribe wrote in the manuscript. To simplify import
into the database, the typed text should follow a specific format—each
rhymed stretch of the poem should appear on a line by itself, blank lines
should be inserted after stanzas, etc. Figure 6a shows stanzas 16 and 17
from an original manuscript version of the Swahili *Ballad of Ja'far*. Fig-
ure 6b shows the same stanzas typed out and ready for import into the
database.

<figure><img src="image_144.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 6. (a) Manuscript stanzas from the Ballad of Ja'far. (b) The stanzas as typed</figcaption></figure>

In Step 2, *Andika!* parses the typed copy of the manuscript, and imports the lines of the poem into a database table. In the process both a standard and a close S2 transcription for the S1 text is automatically generated (Figure 7). Then each line is split into words, which are imported into another database table (Figure 8a).

In Step 3, each word in the database can be inspected to correct the
automatic transcription if necessary. Individual words can then be an-
notated with notes, alternate readings, corrected transliterations, etc., and a translation can be added, as in Figure 8a, keyed to the first word of the line. This allows the development of a full critical apparatus for the text.

In Step 4, the textual material in the database can be exported in PDF format, with various options for text layout, text colouring, line numbering, translation position, etc. Figure 8b shows the two stanzas output as single lines, with S1 Swahili in green, stanza numbering, an English translation, and a generated S2 Swahili transcription. A generated close transcription (in green) is also included, output right-to-left by word so that it matches directly with the S1 script above it.

<figure><img src="image_145.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 7. The stanzas from Figure 6 imported as lines</figcaption></figure>

## 4.2. Other Examples

Mwana Kupona is one of the few female Swahili poets whose work has come down to us. In 1858 she wrote a poem containing advice for her daughter, and stanza 6 reads (in standard S2 Swahili):

mwana adamu si kitu, na ulimwengu si wetu,
walau hakuna mtu ambao atasaliya

*mankind is as nothing, and the world does not belong to us,
and there is no person who will live forever*

Below is an S1 transliteration and an automatically generated close transcription of this stanza from the first of two manuscripts (Figure 9).

مَانَ آدَامُ سِكِّتُ * نَوُلِمَعُ سِوَتُ * وَلَوْ هَكَوْنَ مَتُ * أَبُو أَتَسَلِّيَ

māna aḍāmu sikiṭu * nawulimiğu siwiṭu * walawu hakūna mṭu * abawu aṭasaliya
<table><thead><tr><th>msno</th><th>stanza</th><th>loc</th><th>position</th><th>arabic</th><th>close</th><th>standard</th><th>english</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>16</td><td>16 a</td><td>1</td><td>هُرُم</td><td>huruma</td><td></td><td>huruma</td><td>Ali was seized with pity,</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>16 a</td><td>2</td><td>زَكْمُشِيكَ</td><td>zikamshika</td><td></td><td>zikamshika</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>16 b</td><td>1</td><td>عَلَيْنَ</td><td>'alii</td><td></td><td>alii</td><td>and became perplexed.</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>16 b</td><td>2</td><td>كَشْوَشِيكَ</td><td>kashawishika</td><td></td><td>kashawishika</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>16 c</td><td>1</td><td>كَقَبَ</td><td>kamba</td><td></td><td>kamba</td><td>He said: Fatima, listen --</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>16 c</td><td>2</td><td>فَقُمْ</td><td>fatuma</td><td></td><td>fatuma</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>16 c</td><td>3</td><td>بُلُلَ</td><td>pulika</td><td></td><td>pulika</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>16 d</td><td>1</td><td>الْبُلُلَ</td><td>ulilonalo</td><td></td><td>ulilonalo</td><td>tell me what's wrong with you.</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>16 d</td><td>2</td><td>تَقْبِنْ</td><td>nambiya</td><td></td><td>nambiya</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 a</td><td>1</td><td>أَنْ</td><td>una</td><td></td><td>una</td><td>Do you have a headache,</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 a</td><td>2</td><td>كَتُو</td><td>kitwa</td><td></td><td>kitwa</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 a</td><td>3</td><td>فَكُومْ</td><td>hukuuma</td><td></td><td>hukuuma</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 b</td><td>1</td><td>أَمْ</td><td>ama</td><td></td><td>ama</td><td>or have you a temperature?</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 b</td><td>2</td><td>امْشَكُو</td><td>umeshikwa</td><td></td><td>umeshikwa</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 b</td><td>3</td><td>نِ</td><td>ni</td><td></td><td>ni</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 b</td><td>4</td><td>حُمْ</td><td>huma</td><td></td><td>huma</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 c</td><td>1</td><td>أَكْمَجْتُ</td><td>akamjibu</td><td></td><td>akamjibu</td><td>And Fatima replied:</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 c</td><td>2</td><td>فَقُمْ</td><td>fatuma</td><td></td><td>fatuma</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 d</td><td>1</td><td>كُو</td><td>kwa</td><td></td><td>kwa</td><td>I am not crying because I am ill.</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 d</td><td>2</td><td>مَرَصْ</td><td>maraḍi</td><td></td><td>maradhi</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>17 d</td><td>3</td><td>سِكْلِيْ</td><td>sikuliya</td><td></td><td>sikuliya</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

(a)

(۱۷) هُرُمْ زِكَمْشِكَ * عَلِيْ كَشْوَشِكَ * كَمْبَ فَتُمْ بُلِكَ * أُلْلِنَلْ نَمْبِيَ

nambiya ulilonalo * pulika fatuma kamba * kashawishika 'alii * zikamshika huruma

(16) huruma zikamshika * Aliyi kashawishika * kamba Fatuma pulika * ulilo nalo nambiya

Ali was seized with pity, and became perplexed. He said: Fatima, listen—tell me what's wrong with you.

(۱۸) أَنْ كِتَوْ هُكُوْمَ * أَمْ أُمِشِكُوْ نِ حُمَّ * أَكْمَجِبُ فَتُمَّ * كَوْ مَرَضِ سِكْلِيَ

sikuliya maraḍi kwa * fatuma akamjibu * ḥuma ni umeshikwa ama * hukuuma kitwa una

(17) una kitwa hukuuma * ama umeshikwa na huma * akamjibu Fatuma * kwa maradhi sikuliya

Do you have a headache, or have you a temperature? And Fatima replied: I am not crying because I am ill.

(b)

<caption>FIGURE 8. (a) The stanzas from Figure 6 imported as words. (b) The stanzas from Figure 6 exported as a fully digital text</caption>
<figure><img src="image_146.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 9. Utenzi wa Mwana Kupona, stanza 6, first manuscript.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_147.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 10. Utenzi wa Mwana Kupona, stanza 6, second manuscript.</figcaption></figure>

Figure 10 shows the same stanza from a second manuscript. The S1 transliteration and transcription below show notable spelling differences compared to the first manuscript (e.g., the use of ‘ayn ع and ha ح), and a typo in the first word, where fatha and sukun have been reversed.

مَوْنَ عَدَمُ سِكِّتُ * نَوْلِمِعُ سِوَتُ * وَلَوْ حَبَانَ مَتُ * آپُو اتَسَالِيَا
mawna ‘adamu sikiṭu * nawlimiġu siwiṭu * walaw ḫapāna mṭu * apawu atasāliyā

Sayidi Abudallah (Hichens, 1939) wrote a lament in 1853 about the declining fortunes of the coastal city-state of Pate. The two stanzas shown in Figure 11, given here in S2 Swahili, describe the opulence of the town in its better days:

Nyumba zao mbake zikinawiri kwa taa za kowa na za sufuri;
masiku yakele kama nahari, haiba na jaha iwazingiye.

Wapambiye swini ya kuteuwa, na kulla kikombe kinakishiwa;
kati watiziye kuzi za kowa katika mapambo yanawiriye.

Their homes were brightly lit with lamps of mother-of-pearl and copper;
the nights stayed bright as day, beauty and privilege surrounded them.

They decorated their fine porcelain, and every goblet was engraved;
in the centre they placed mother-of-pearl carafes, to glitter amongst
the fine things.

The transcription and close transliteration below show how the Arabic script is only a partial representation of the sounds of Swahili. Three vowel glyphs are used to represent Swahili's five vowels (e.g., *yakili* for *yakele*, 'stayed', *kuwa* for *kowa*, 'shell'), and prenasalised consonants are not distinguished (*yuba* for *nyumba*, 'house', *mapabu* for *mapambo*, 'decorative objects').
<figure><img src="image_148.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 11. Two stanzas from al-Inkishafi.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_149.png" /></figure>

Figure 12 shows part of a manuscript by the late Sh. Yahya Ali Omar recording fishing songs in kiBajuni or kiTikuu, a northern Swahili dialect (Donnelly and Omar, 1982).

The automatic S2 transliteration uses a variant of the close transcription, so that it stays as close as possible to standard Swahili orthography, while still representing the distinctive sounds of kiTikuu (see 3.5).

The *Ballad of Mkunumbi* (Harries, 1967) is one of the few books of Swahili poetry to include the S1 text of the manuscript.

This digitisation of the stanza in Figure 13 shows a close transcription only, keyed to the half-line rather than the full line. It also adds stanza numbers in eastern Arabic numerals for the S1 transcription, and in western Arabic numerals for the transcription, where the half-lines are also indicated.
السَّلَامُ عَلَيْكُمْ * وَ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَانِ
assalāmu alaykum * wa alayhi assalāni
سَالَ نَدْ وَيْحِي إِنْمَامْ گَوْدَ نَدْوِيْنِي نَدْ مَايْ
نَسَالَ حِيْ نَدْ ذِي چِحْ
سَاسَ نَوَ تَاكِ چِكَّا يُهِيْفُ چِتَمْوِيْجَ بِشِيْهِ غَايِ
چِتَمْوِيْجَ هُوَ رَأَدُ وَ بِئِلْ مُكَيْمَانِ
پُوْيْنَمَبْ لِيُقْيِدُ وَانْعُ ھُوَلَ ضُوَهَغْيُ نَدْ مَايِ
السَّلَامُ عَلَيْكُمْ * وَ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَانِ
assalāmu alaykum * wa alayhi assalāni
سَالَ نَدْ وَيْنِي إِيْنَدِ * ھُوَدِ نَدْ وَيْنِي نَدَانِ
sāla nḍa wěnye inḍe * hōḍi nḍa wěnye nḍāni
نَ سَالَ هِيْ نَدْ ذِي چِحَ * مُسْوَوْنِ نِأَمَانِ
na sāla hii nḍa zītā * msiwōne niamāni
سَاسَ تُوَ تَاكِچِئَ پِيْفُ * چِتَمْوِيْجَ شِيْهِ غَانِ
sāsa ṭwaṭākatia pēfu * tūtamwīta shēhe gāni
چِتَمْوِيْجَ مَفْرِادُ * وَ پِيْلِ مُكَيْمَانِ
tūtamwīta mfirado * wa pīli mkoyamāni
پِيْنَبِ نِ أُقِيْدٌ وَانْعُ * ھُوَلَ كْوَ مَغْيَغُ نَدَانِ
pēmbe ni uwēz̥o wāngu * hūla kwa magēgo nḍāni

<caption>FIGURE 12. Stanza from a Bajuni fishing song.</caption>

١ ذُوْلَ مُبْلِ زِلْوَانَ
شِكُوْ نَاسِمْبَ مُبْوَانَ
shikuwe nāsimba mbawāna
dōla mbili ziliwāna 1b/a
مَتَانَ نَلَيْلِي
مَكَتْبَرِ كُشِنْدَانَ
mṭāna nalayliya kamaṭezo kushinḍāna 1d/c
<figure><img src="image_150.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 13. A stanza from the Ballad of Mkunumbi</figcaption></figure>

The *Ballad of Rasi’lGhuli* was written around 1850 by Mgeni bin Faqihi, and at over 4,500 stanzas is the longest Swahili ballad in existence (van Kessel, 1979). This digitisation of stanza 2,280 (Figure 14) has a close transcription keyed to the half-line, and a standard transcription keyed to the full line.

<figure><img src="image_151.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 14. Stanza 2,280 from the Ballad of Rasi’lGhuli</figcaption></figure>

٢٢٨٠
نَخَدَقِ فَهَمُنِ
مَبَنِي تَبَيَّنِ
mabanayi tabayini
nakhadaqi fahamuni
na khandaqi fahamuni * mpanaye tabaini

2280b/a
2280a/b

نِذْرَعَ عِشْرِنِ
كَذِرَعَ زَمَكْفُرِ
kadhira’a zamakufari
nidhira’a ishirini
ni dhiraa ishirini * kwa dhiraa za makufari

2280d/c
2280c/d

Qasidas are panegyric poems in Arabic eulogising the Prophet (Knap-pert, 1971; Sperl and Shackl, 1995). The *Qasida ya Burda* was composed in Arabic by Muhammad bin Sa‘idi al-Busiri in the 1300s, and rendered into Swahili verse by Muhammad bin Athumani Hajji al-Hilali Mshela, 1840-1930 (wa Mutiso, 1996). The digitisation of the manuscript in Figure 15 has been set to show the original text in Arabic in blue.

The *Qasida Hamziyya* (so called because it rhymes in *hamza* ε) was composed in Arabic by Muhammad bin Sa‘idi al-Busiri (1212-1294), and rendered into Swahili verse by Aidarus bin Athumani bin Ali bin Sheikh Abubakar bin Salim in (probably) 1749 (Knappert, 1968; Parkar, 2020). The digitisation of the manuscript in Figure 15 shows the original text in Arabic in blue, and no transcription.
<figure><img src="image_152.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_153.png" /><figcaption>FIGURE 15. First stanza of the Qasida ya Burda</figcaption></figure>

لَمْ يُسَاوُكَ فِي عُلَاكَ وَقَدْ حَالَ * سَنَي مِنْكَ دُوْنَهُمْ وَ سَنَاءُ
lam yusāwuka fi ‘ulāka waqad hāla * sanay minka dūnahum wa sanā’u

كَوَفَنِ نَوِ رِفْعَانِ بَحْجِزِلِ * نُورُ نَرْفُعَةَ كَتِكِنُ كُلُّ عَظِيمُ
kawafani nawi rif‘āni bahajizili * nūru naru‘fařa katikinu kulu ‘aẓīma

*They are not equal to you in your elevated status,
the light and sublimity in you is great (in all respect).*

<caption>FIGURE 16. Second stanza of the Qasida Hamziyya</caption>

Figure 16 shows a digitisation of second stanza of the poem. Here again the Arabic original is in blue, and there is an English translation. Both have a close transcription (though the Arabic one, as noted in 3.5, is less than optimal).

*Andika!* also allows multiple copies of the same poem to be presented in parallel. Below are S1 digitisations of two manuscript versions of the *Ballad of Ja'far* (see 4.1 above), each coloured differently, so that they can be compared (in this example, the third line of the stanza differs in each version). Each version has an S2 standard transliteration, keyed to the stanza, and a close transcription (coloured to match the S1 text) keyed
to the S2 word. An English translation is attached to the first (Y) manu-
script version.

(٢٦) كَمْجِبُ كَوْ لِسَنِ * مُتْيِ سِمْبَئِنِ * پِتُ اُمْپِيْ نَنِ * أُنِّيَپُ تَهَرْضِيَ

thariḍiya unipapo * nani umpee peṭe * simbaini mṭuye * lisani kwa kamjibu

Y 25 [23] (26) kamjibu kwa lisani * mtuye simbaini *pete umpee nani * unipapo
taridhiya

*She replied forcefully: I will not disclose that person.*

*Who have you given the ring to? [Only] when you give [it to me] will I be satisfied.*

كَمْجِبُ كَوْ لِسَنِ * مُتْيِ سِمْبَاءِنِ * پِتِ يَكُ يَكَنْدَانِ * أُنِّيَپُ تَرَظِيْيَا

tariẓīyā unipapo * yakī'andāni yaku piti * simbaini mtuyi * lisani kwā kamjibu

R 26 [26] kamjibu kwa lisani * mtuye simbaini * pete yako ya chandani * unipapo
taridhiya

4.3. Beyond the Manuscript

Storing manuscript text in a database, as *Andika*! does, opens up some
interesting possibilities. As noted earlier, one important side-effect is
the easy creation of concordances and indexes. If the wordstores for
a number of different manuscripts are combined (in effect, creating a
searchable literary corpus), we get a multiplier effect: we are working
across manuscripts instead of within them. Such a corpus would, for
instance, allow scholars to:

- study character usage and spelling conventions, which may help clarify the genealogy of particular manuscripts;

- trace the occurrence of particular words and examine vocabulary usage in general, which may identify particular schools or authors;

- analyse textual features such as syntactic structure, which could be useful in researching diachronic and synchronic variation;

- consider the usage of fixed expressions (formulae), which may give clues about the process of composition and recital.

As an example, studying the wordstore for the *Ballad of Ja'far* referred
to several times above allows some significant conclusions to be drawn:

- the verbal consecutive (non-time specific) marker occurs in 30% of all verbforms, reflecting the emphasis on timeless action in the ballad;

- around a quarter of the words in the ballad are derived from Arabic;
- Arabic words are more likely to occur in rhyming positions in stanza-internal lines, suggesting that considerations of rhyme and metre are their main rationale;

- one in five of the verbs used relate to speaking (*say*, *reply*, *speak*, *greet*, etc.);

- almost half of the stanza-internal lines use just three rhymes (-ni, -ri, -ka);

- ready-made rhyme-sets seem to be available that will allow the reciter to refer to one of the characters saying something, and bring in a reference to God if appropriate.

## 5. Conclusions

This paper has argued that “full” digitisation of S1 heritage manuscripts is the only approach that will liberate the cultural riches locked in them, and avoid them being seen as museum objects that belong in the past, defined solely by type of paper, ink composition, and layout. Such manuscripts are more than just scanned images—they are unique snapshots of a nexus of cultural ideas that still speak to the present and future, even if they were produced in the past. To engage with these ideas, we need to pay these manuscripts the courtesy of transitioning them fully to the digital age, so that we can bring to bear all the tools now available to us in unlocking their meaning.

The *Andika!* toolset described here is one possible way in which this concept could be executed. It is still a work-in-progress, but the concept could be adapted to any language where cultural material is available in a displaced script. Funders of humanities research might also consider the benefits of generating local employment in the “knowledge industry” by paying local people to type heritage manuscripts into a computer alongside the work already being done to scan manuscripts.

## References

Chtatou, Mohamed (2010). *Using Arabic script in writing African languages, revisiting ISESCO's experience 25 years later: Field successes and shortcomings*. Paper presented at the workshop “The Arabic Script In Africa: Diffusion, Usage, Diversity And Dynamics Of A Writing System,” University Of Cologne.

Donnelly, Kevin and Yahya Ali Omar (1982). “Structure and association in Bajuni fishing songs.” In: *Genres, Forms, Meanings: Essays in African Oral Literature*. Ed. by Veronika Görög-Karady. Vol. 1. JASO Occasional Papers, pp. 109–122.
Harries, Lyndon (1967). *Utenzi wa Mkunumbi. A Swahili Potlatch—The Poem about Mkunumbi*. Nairobi: East African Literature Bureau.

Hichens, William (1939). *Al-Inkishafi: The Soul's Awakening*. London: Sheldon Press.

Hinnebusch, Thomas J. (2003). "Swahili." In: *International Encyclopedia of Linguistics*. Ed. by William J. Frawley. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 99–106.

Knappert, Jan (1967). *Traditional Swahili Poetry*. Leiden: Brill.

——— (1968). "The Hamziya deciphered." In: *African Language Studies* 9, pp. 52–81.

——— (1971). *Swahili Islamic Poetry*. Leiden: Brill.

——— (1972). *A Choice of Flowers: Swahili Songs of Love and Passion*. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

——— (1982). *Four Centuries of Swahili Verse: A Literary History and Anthology*. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Mumin, Meikal (2014). "The Arabic script in Africa: Understudied literature." In: *The Arabic Script in Africa: Studies in the Use of a Writing System*. Ed. by Meikal Mumin and Kees Versteegh. Leiden: Brill, pp. 41–76.

Omar, Yahya Ali and P. J. L. Frankl (1997). "An historical review of the Arabic rendering of Swahili, together with proposals for the development of a Swahili writing system in Arabic script." In: *Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society*. 3rd ser. 7.1, pp. 55–71.

Ottenheimer, Harriet J. (2012). "Ideology and orthography. Dictionary construction and spelling choice in the Comoro Islands." In: *Études océan Indien* 48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/oceanindien.1521.

Parkar, Ahmed (2020). "Manuscripts and Transmission of Knowledge in Swahili Society: A Comparative Analysis of Form and Usage of Qaṣīda al-Hamziyya." PhD thesis. University of Hamburg.

Sacleux, Charles (1939). *Dictionnaire swahili-français*. Vol. 36. Travaux et mémoires de l'Institut d'Ethnologie. Paris: Institut d'Ethnologie.

Sperl, Stefan and Christopher Shackl, eds. (1995). *Qasida Poetry in Islamic Asia and Africa*. Leiden: Brill.

van Kessel, Leo (1979). *Utenzi wa Rasi ʾlGhuli*. Dar-es-Salaam: Tanzania Publishing House.

Vierke, Clarissa (2014). "Akhi patia kalamu: Writing Swahili poetry in Arabic script." In: *The Arabic Script in Africa: Studies in the Use of a Writing System*. Leiden: Brill, pp. 319–339.

wa Mutiso, Kineene (1996). "Archetypal Motifs in Swahili Islamic Poetry: Kasida ya Burudai." PhD thesis. University of Nairobi.

Warren-Rothlin, Andy (2014). "West African scripts and Arabic-script orthographies in socio-political context." In: *The Arabic Script in Africa: Studies in the Use of a Writing System*. Leiden: Brill, pp. 261–289.
# A Semantic Index for a Dongba Script Database

Duoduo Xu

*Abstract.* Dongba script is a pictographic writing system still in use in South-West China. The Dongba dictionaries provide valuable resources and should be used in complete synergy to build up a character repertoire. A semantic index with the pictographic radicals, along with other kinds of indexes, is necessary for an ideographic writing system such as Dongba script, while the studies on Dongba radicals are at a preliminary stage. This semantic index also contributes to show that similar markers arose in a logographic system.

## 1. Introduction

The Dongba script has been enlisted in the World Memory Heritage by the Unesco in 2003. It is a unique pictographic writing system, still in use today.<fnref n="1" /> Its pictographs are used to convey in their own way, basically through semantic-visual stylized signs and much less through phono-grams, the Naxi thought and language (a member of the Yi, aka “Lolo-ish,” branch of the Tibetan-Burman language family), see Ramsey (1987, pp. 249–250). With the recognition of this writing system, many other pictographic scripts have been brought into light. Among other places, South-West China shows to be a cradle of pictographic writings, e.g., Ersu Shaba script (Sun, 1982), Pumi Hangul script (Song, 2010), Muya Sujowu script (Liu and Huang, 2013), Namuzi Pabi/Pazi script (Wang and Wang, 2013), Lhoba Niubu script (Zhao, 2014), etc.<fnref n="2" /> Scholars pointed out that the development of early writing systems can be reconstructed through the analysis of these scripts belonging to ethnic groups (Song, 2010).

Many “scribal models” around the world share similar techniques in conveying information. For example, the so-called Dakota winter counts [Lakota Sioux lineage groups, U.S.] (Howard), Mi’q-m’aq

Duoduo Xu ID 0000-0001-6734-8405

Nanyang Technological University

E-mail: duoduo.xu@ntu.edu.sg

Y. Haralambous (Ed.), *Grapholinguistics in the 21st Century 2020. Proceedings*

Grapholinguistics and Its Applications (ISSN: 2681-8566, e-ISSN: 2534-5192), Vol. 5.

Fluxus Editions, Brest, 2021, pp. 985–1006. https://doi.org/10.36824/2020-graf-xudu

ISBN: 978-2-9570549-7-8, e-ISBN: 978-2-9570549-9-2

<footnote n="1">1. Revised Proposal for Encoding Naxi Dongba Pictographic Script in the SMP of the UCS, 2011.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2. More scripts can be found in Zhao (2013).</footnote>
(= Micmac) [Atlantic seaboard / Quebec North-shore, Canada], and Rongorongo [Rapa Nui / Easter Island; modern Chilean territory], seem inventories of certain dates. Kuna (= Cuna) Mola [San Blas Islands on the Atlantic side of Panamá, with minor settlements in the Chucunaque region of the Darien forest, near the Colombian border], used to be body painting patterns.

These scribal symbols show different stages of the development of writing systems. While most pictographic scripts are strictly attested in specific documents, such as indigenous religious manuscripts, calendars, or songs (e.g., Poya Script of Zhuang People in Guangxi Province, China), Dongba script is used also to transcribe local language besides Dongba scriptures. Moreover, Dongba script possesses a greater number of glyphs, if compared to the others.

Moso/Na People ‘live’ at the border between orality and literacy.<fnref n="3" /> The correspondence between the Dongba glyphs and the Moso/Na language they transcribe is different from the one between well-known mature writing systems and their related languages, such as Chinese, Japanese, Latin, Sanskrit, Arabic, etc. Traditionally, Dongba glyphs are used for scriptures. In these works, the pictograms transcribe only the keywords of a verse in Dongba chants (Fu, 1982, p. 6; Wang, 1988, p. 124; Yu, 2009, p. 19). Dongba priests can read out the complete verses from the scriptures, according to the oral versions of the texts learnt by heart (Li, 1997, pp. 70–71).<fnref n="4" />

Dongba writings has also undergone ‘evolution’. Dongba glyphs have been used to transcribe secular documents (notation of accounts, land contracts, letters, etc.) in which they are utilized as phonetic loans to write down each syllable of a sentence (Yu, 2003, pp. 252–282; Yu, 2008, pp. 124–250). In the contemporary world, Dongba pictographs are applied to transcribe couplets, modern vernacular language, and even for-

<footnote n="3">3. “Moso” is the old appellation of this ethnic group living along the Jinsha River, the main branch of the upper stream of the Yangtze River. The literature records of this ethnic group can be traced back to the Jin Dynasty (265–420 AD; Chang, 1987, p. 210). It was still spotted in documents during the period of the Republic of China. On the other hand, “Na” is the Romanized word of the shared syllable of their endonyms. During the nationality recognition conducted by China in 1950s, the western branch of Moso People has been recognized as “Naxi” People, according to their endonym //-. According to language documentation studies, the other branches share the similar morphological structure of their endonyms: the syllable “na” followed by the word for “people”. The syllable “na” is homophonic to the word meaning “black, big”. Therefore, some scholars use “Na/Naish” People to refer to this ancient ethnic group (Jacques and Michaud, 2011). According to ISO 639–3, the diacrites of Moso/Na languages are assigned to two different codes: “nxq” for Naxi and “nru” for Na.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">4. The eastern branch remains still an oral community. Their writing system includes a limited number of pictographs which are only known by the Daba priests (Song, 2003; Xu, 2017a).</footnote>
eign brands (e.g., “Starbucks,” cf. Poupard, 2019, p. 54). Dongba priests
can also apply their writings to transcribe IPA (cf. Zhao, 2013, p. 76). Ac-
cording to the framework of writing systems developed by Gelb (1952,
pp. 190–194), Dongba script should be categorized as a semasiogra-
phy used as an identifying-mnemonic device, which is undergoing the
change into phonography.

The present study focuses on a crucial first step to digitize Dongba
script: the construction of a font database of Dongba glyphs. The au-
thor provides an in-depth analysis of the Dongba radicals which lays a
foundation for a font database. A font database includes a comprehen-
sive collection of Dongba glyphs and sets up a semantic index that can
be compared to radicals in Chinese characters.

2. The Development of Dongba Digitization

*E-Dongba* is the first keyboard for typing Dongba pictograms (2001-
2020). This keyboard can input Dongba pictographs through either se-
mantics or Naxi *pinyin*. Chinese and English translations of each Dongba
character are embedded into the system. The lexical database of *E-
Dongba* is based on Fang and He (1981).<fnref n="5" /> The Dongbafont implemented
in *E-Dongba* includes 1,561 Dongba hieroglyphs and 661 Geba scripts,
along with 50 International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) characters for the
Naxi language.

Several other attempts to type in Dongba pictographs were produced
(see in Table 1). Among the five patents, three depend on semantics and
two on the shapes of the characters. These keyboards aim at enabling
users not knowing much about Dongba pictographs to type in these
characters. The action of typing in Dongba pictographs according to
their meanings involves the issue of translation. To key-in Dongba pic-
tographs according to the composition of the characters requires a de-
tailed analysis of several aspects of each character (components, strikes,
crossing points, etc.), which could also be challenging.

Besides the virtual keyboard, several designs of Dongba script were
published open-source, e.g., 遊トンパ, 遊トンパ年賀 (Kojima, 2002–2004).
They are self-designed fonts in TrueType format, together with a char-
acter table displaying limited graphs (215, which is about one tenth of
the inventory of Dongba pictographs).<fnref n="6" />

As a foundation of a key-in system, a database of the characters needs
to be settled. The Unicode encoding project aims at providing an inter-

<footnote n="5">5. Cf. The third official Unicode proposal N4043 (L2/11-178: 2) submitted in 2011.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">6. There are three ways to input text in Unicode: by selecting characters from a table; by virtual keyboard; by converting data that exist in other encodings (Haralambous, 2007, p. 159).</footnote>
<table><caption>TABLE 1. Patents of Academic Institutions</caption><thead><tr><td>Title and Number</td><td>Publication</td><td>Institution</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>纳西东巴象形文字的分类拼意输入方法及其键盘 (CN1547094A) A Keyboard to Type Dongba Pictographs Based on Semantic Categorization</td><td>2004.11</td><td>大理学院 Dali University</td></tr><tr><td>东巴文图元输入法及键盘 (CN101477408A) A Keyboard to Type Dongba Pictographs Based on Structures and Strokes</td><td>2009.07</td><td>大连民族学院 Dalian Minzu Institute</td></tr><tr><td>纳西-汉-英输入法的实现方法 (CN103677305A) A Naxi-Chinese-English Keyboard to Type Dongba Pictographs</td><td>2014.03</td><td>昆明理工大学 Kunming University of Science and Technology</td></tr><tr><td>基于图形拓扑特征进行识别的纳西东巴象形文字输入方法 (CN104866117A) A Keyboard to Type Dongba Pictographs Based on Graphic Topology</td><td>2015.08</td><td>北京科技大学 University of Science and Technology Beijing</td></tr><tr><td>纳西东巴象形文和中文的综合输入方法 (CN106055124A) A Naxi-Chinese Keyboard to Type Dongba Pictographs</td><td>2016.10</td><td>河南农业大学 Henan Agricultural University</td></tr></tbody></table>

national standard for computer processing of the Dongba pictographs, in order to facilitate an easier transmission of the data on the internet. The preliminary task of this goal is to settle down the number of Dongba characters and the unified forms of them. The script has a tentative allocation at U+1A800 to U+1ACFF. The related proposals, comments, and meeting records are chronologically listed on the website SCRIPT-SOURCE.<fnref n="7" /> A summary of the Unicode proposal progress is displayed in Table 2.

<table><caption>TABLE 2. Summary of Unicode Proposal Progress</caption><thead><tr><td>Title (Year)</td><td># ch.</td><td>Principles of Selecting</td><td>Order of Characters</td><td>Information of Characters</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>L2/00-048 (2000)</td><td>48</td><td>different syllables</td><td>alphabetic</td><td>column-row</td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote n="7">7. The webpage of Dongba script: https://scriptsource.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=entry_detail\&uid=lb7t8h9k6v.</footnote>
<table><tr><td>N3425 (2008)</td><td>1203</td><td>A. exclude variants B. exclude most phonetic loans C. include only the stable compounds D. exclude Geba script</td><td>semantic (reference unclear, possibly Naxi Dongba Guji Yizhu Quanji)</td><td>serial number</td></tr><tr><td>N3442 (2008)</td><td></td><td>Geba signs should be included; lexical sources besides Naxi Dongba Guji Yizhu Quanji should be cross-checked; the characters should be assigned to tentative code points</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>N3935 (2010)</td><td>1188</td><td>A, C, &amp; D B. include only one phonetic loan</td><td>alphabetic (based on the Naxi Pinyin orthography)</td><td>English translation</td></tr><tr><td>N3965 (2010)</td><td></td><td>Naxi Dongba pictographs were "pre-writing" rather than a writing system.</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>N4043 (2011); N4633 (2014)<sup>8</sup></td><td>1188</td><td>A. exclude variants B. exclude Geba script</td><td>alphabetic (based on the Naxi Pinyin orthography)</td><td>English translation; character name (Naxi Pinyin transcription)</td></tr><tr><td>N4641 (2014)</td><td></td><td>provide details of each Dongba glyph, including: 1) glyphs in the Dongba script, 2) IPA transcription, 3) Romanized orthography, 4) Chinese gloss for each syllable, 5) English translation of each Chinese gloss</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>N4877 (2017)</td><td>1572</td><td>Fang and He (1981)</td><td>semantic</td><td>character name (Naxi Pinyin transcription)</td></tr><tr><td>N4878 (2017)</td><td>2164</td><td>Li, Zhang, and He (1972)</td><td>semantic</td><td>character name (Naxi Pinyin transcription)</td></tr><tr><td>N4895 &amp; N4898 (2017)</td><td>1188</td><td>the same repertoire as N4043</td><td>alphabetic</td><td>character name (Naxi Pinyin transcription); IPA transcription; gloss in both English and Chinese</td></tr><tr><td>N4895 (2017)</td><td></td><td>provide an explanation of how some characters can combine</td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

<footnote n="8">8. The proposal of 2014 remains the same as the 2011 one, with a supplementary file about the modern use of the Dongba script. The comments on N4043 (2011) remain the same as the ones in N3965, issued in 2010 (cf. N4060).</footnote>
L2/18-321
(2018)
the repertoire of 1188 characters omitted many commonly used
ligatures (onomastics); the records of polyphone and poly-
morphic characters; three popular methods of combination of
Dongba graphemes: *combination of two ideograms attaching phonetic
grapheme to a logograph adding a morphemic grapheme indicating the
colour of the object*

L2/19-173 (2019) what two-dimensional model will be used to present the script

3. A Semantic Index for a Dongba Script Database

3.1. The Notion of Dongba Radical

The latest Unicode Proposal arranges the Dongba glyphs following a
phonetic order, the same as in Rock (1963). However, the semantic
order strategy was the more popular criterion applied in Dongba dic-
tionaries, such as Li, Zhang, and He (1972), Fang and He (1981), and
Rock (1972). The 2,120 entries in Li, Zhang, and He (1972) were di-
vided into eighteen categories. The 1,340 entries in Fang and He (1981)
were divided into eighteen categories either. Rock (1972) contains four-
teen categories of special vocabulary of Dongba culture, in addition to
the basic vocabulary recorded in Rock (1963).

The idea substantiating Li, Zhang, and He (1972) and Fang and He (1981) is comparable to the strategy of some traditional Chinese dictionaries. For example, *Erya 爾雅*, a first surviving Chinese dictionary (pre-Qin Dynasty, cf. Karlgen, 1931, p. 49; Needham, Lu, and Huang, 1986, p. 191), which provided lexicographic guides to the Chinese characters of nineteen semantic categories. While Rock (1963) and Rock (1972) collect lexicons rather than characters.

As for a font database, *Shuowen Jiezi* 說文解字 (completed in 100 AD by Xu Shen) could be a model. In this dictionary, 9,553 Chinese characters (and other 1,163 variants) are categorized into 540 sections according to their major semantic components. The same categories are then catalogued according to the similarities of their forms.

The semantic order has been chosen partially due to the fact that the pictographic Dongba script consists of logographs. The characters with related meanings share the same graphemes, which are comparable to radicals in Chinese. A Chinese radical is a graphical component of a character "giving in a very general way something of the meaning of the character" (Chao 1948: 104-105). The notion was introduced by Xu Shen as "section" (" 部 ") in *Shuowen Jiezi*. It then became a standard in the compilation of dictionaries.<fnref n="9" /> The term "radical" (" 部首 ") was first used

<footnote n="9">9. In this dictionary, Xu Shen established the six types of composition of Chinese characters (i.e., philological theory called “Liushu 六书”). Similarly, there were dis-</footnote>
in the *Kangxi Dictionary* 康熙字典 (Wilkinson, 2013, p. 74), which literally means “section heading” (Woon, 1987, pp. 147–148). The “radicals” are simplified categorizations of “sections”. The number of radicals is 214 in the *Kangxi Dictionary*. The term has various other translated names, such as “semantic element,” “key,” “classifier,” “determinative,” and “signific,” while “radical” is the most common (DeFrancis, 1984, p. 80).

At the current stage, none of the current key-in systems is designed according to radicals, while radicals can be highlighted among Dongba glyphs. As for the pictographic writing system, the radicals are closely related to the semantic categories of Dongba glyphs. For example, the glyphs in the category “astronomy” can be classified into fifteen groups according to their shared components: ⌜ “sky” (phonetic loan variant: ⌜ “mushroom”), ⌜ “sun,” ⌜ “moon,” ⌜ “month,” ⌜ “star,” ⌜ “star; bright,” ⌜ “the constellation of zdo (hybrid of yak and cattle),” = “wind,” ⌜ “rain,” ⌜ “snow,” ⌜ “cloud,” ⌜ “dew,” ⌜ “lightening,” ⌜ “rainbow,” and ⌜ “time”.

The glyphs may contain more than one radical. For example, in the glyphs representing the four seasons, each glyph consists of the pictogram of the representative feature of the season: = “wind,” ⌜ “rain,” “crop on the ground” (花 “flower” is homophonic to the word “crop”), “snow,” along with “three” and ⌜ “month”.

<table><caption>TABLE 3. Dongba Glyphs of the Three Months of Each Season</caption><thead><tr><th>Glyph</th><th>Naxi Pinyin</th><th>Morphemes</th><th>Gloss</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>“花”</td><td>/nioq seel hei/</td><td>spring-three-month</td><td>“three months of spring”</td></tr><tr><td>“水”</td><td>/roq seel hei/</td><td>summer-three-month</td><td>“three months of summer”</td></tr><tr><td>“雪”</td><td>/chvl seel hei/</td><td>autumn-three-month</td><td>“three months of autumn”</td></tr><tr><td>“风”</td><td>/cee seel hei/</td><td>winter-three-month</td><td>“three months of winter”</td></tr><tr><td>“雨”</td><td>/ce seel hei/</td><td>winter-three-month</td><td>“three months of winter”</td></tr></tbody></table>

Yu (2003, p. 25) categorizes Dongba glyphs into three types according to their constructions: pictogram (“单字”), ligature (“合文”), and fixed-group glyphs (“字组”). The four glyphs of the seasons mentioned above, for example, are “fixed-group glyphs”. Each component corresponds to one syllable of the designation of the glyph. Among

cussions on the composition methods of Dongba glyphs, e.g., Z. He (1976) highlighted seven categories, Fang and He (1981, pp. 56–72) analysed ten types of structures attested in Dongba pictographs, Wang (1988, pp. 44–54) proposed five basic methods, Zhou (1994) and Yu (2008, pp. 12–37) applied the *Liushu* Theory of Chinese to Dongba script.
these components, “wind,” “rain,” “snow,” “three,” and “month,” are pictograms, read as “spring,” “summer,” “winter,” “three,” and “month,” respectively, while “autumn” is a ligature, which consists of two pictograms (“flower” and “ground”), but is read as the word for “autumn”.

Zamblera (2018) is an initial work on a pictogram-based semantic index of Dongba writing.<fnref n="10" /> The author categorizes the Dongba glyphs into “basic pictographs” and “complex pictographs”. A “basic pictograph” is defined as “made by one and just one iconographic unit (signifier) that conveys its meaning through its pictorial resemblance to the physical object meant,” while a “complex pictograph” can be divided into two sets: “composed units” and “fusion units”. Table 4 shows the correspondences among the terms defined by Yu (2003) and Zamblera (2018) for the different types of Dongba glyphs.<fnref n="11" />

<table><caption>TABLE 4. The Terms for Dongba Glyph Types</caption><thead><tr><td>Yu (2003)</td><td>Zamblera (2018)</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>pictogram (“单字”)</td><td>basic pictographs</td></tr><tr><td>ligature (“合文”)</td><td>complex pictographs—fusion units</td></tr><tr><td>fixed-group glyphs (“字组”)</td><td>complex pictographs—composed units</td></tr></tbody></table>

The notion “basic pictograph” can be a counterpart of “radical” in the Chinese writing system, while “composed units” and “fusion units” are two major methods of composition of Dongba ligatures. In Dongba writing system, a radical can be an ideogram, a phonetic symbol, or a signifier.

The function of Dongba radicals are slightly different from those in the Chinese writing, due to the grammatological features of the Dongba script. The fixed-group glyphs consist of multiple pictograms to represent a word or phrase, which are read as multiple syllables. Therefore, a pictogram in a ligature functions as the radical (in the Chinese writing), while, in a fixed-group glyph, the pictograms are components, which can be linked to the radical index.

<footnote n="10">10. Description of this project, references, and other documentation can be found at the webpage “Naxi Dongba: Naxi People Culture and Dongba Tradition,” published by Stefano Zamblera in 2009. URL: www.xiulong.it/4.0/Dongba/homeengl.htm.</footnote>

<footnote n="11">11. A description of these distinctive components can lead to the refinement of the two types of “complex pictographs,” as in Chinese “Liushu” Theory and other discussions about the composition of Dongba glyphs.</footnote>
## 3.2. The Elicitation of Dongba Radicals

The present study provides an in-depth analysis of Dongba radicals based on Li, Zhang, and He (1972). The glyphs in the respective categories are ordered according to their semantic similarities. Some categories are organized more coherently to the shared component among the glyphs. Like in the case of the glyphs of the categories astronomy and geography, where each star or planet and each type of landscape, have a distinctive pictograph (cf. Appendix).

Conversely, some categories require more analysis in order to elicit the radicals. For example, the 341 glyphs (No. 230–570) in the category “humanity” generally share a basic grapheme indicating the notion of “human”. However, one radical in itself would not be enough for searching purposes. Looking through the glyphs, it is possible to classify the words into nouns (natures and relations of human being) and verbs (movements of human being).

The noun section include 13 minor semantic groups: ☞ “human,” ethnic groups based on standing figures like ☞ “Guzo People” and ☞ “Bai People,” ☞ “human,” ☞ “enemy,” ☞-1 “woman,” ☞ “to sit (siting figures),” ☞ “Indian,” ☞ “manager,” ☞ “dead,” ☞ “body,” ☞ “big,” ☞ “open hair”. The glyph ☞ “to sit (siting figures)” stands for a verb by itself. It has been listed in the noun section due to the fact that the glyphs connected with this radical are nouns, such as ☞ “emperor,” ☞ “guest,” and ☞ “lama priest”. These glyphs are created by depicting sitting figures.

The verb section include 27 minor semantic groups, describing 15 types of movements:

1. movements of the legs: ☞ “to jump,” ☞ “to kneel,” ☞ “to lean on,” ☞ “to fall,” ☞ “to tremble,” ☞ “to run,” ☞ “to step across,” ☞ “to fold,” ☞ “to get up”;

2. movements of the arms: ☞ “to lift,” ☞ “to fly”;

3. movements of excretion: ☞ “to wee”;

4. movements of the mouth: ☞ “to speak”;

5. movements of creeping: ☞ “to crawl”;

6. movements of the waist: ☞ “to bow”;

7. movements of the head: ☞ “to hit with head”;

8. movements of the hand: ☞ “to paste,” ☞ “to bring”;

9. movements of bringing instrument: ☞ “to bring knife,” ☞ “to pull,” ☞ “to chase”;

10. movements of the eyes: ☞ “to look”;

11. movements of a people above an object: ☞ “to ride”;

12. movements of mind: ☞ “sad”;

13. movements of woman: ☞-2 “woman”;

14. mutual movements between two people: ☞ ☞ “to fight”;

15. movements of one people on another: ☞ “to beat”.
In Zamblera (2018), Dongba pictographs are documented according to twenty-five semantic categories with 405 subcategories (“basic pictographs”).<fnref n="12" /> The references of this dictionary include Rock (1963), Rock (1972), Fang and He (1981), Li, Zhang, and He (1972), and two recent collections: P. He (2004) and Dragan (2005).<fnref n="13" /> While the traditional dictionaries start from “astronomy,” “geography,” human related aspects, and, then, all sorts of animals, etc., Zamblera (2018) reorganized them according to an order that begins from “human” and proceeds to “deities,” all sorts of animals, plants, etc. Moreover, “woman” has been distinguished as an independent category, in contrast to “man,” in this new work.

The number of “basic pictograph” in each semantic category can be further studied. For example, according to my analysis based on Li, Zhang, and He (1972), there are 38 radicals belonging to “body parts of human,” while in the index plate of Zamblera (2018) their number is 15. By comparing Zamblera’s and the author’s results, thirteen radicals result to be the same. Among the two Zamblera’s basic pictographs not included in my analysed radicals, “body” and “hair” are not recorded in the fourth section “parts of human body and their movements” in Li, Zhang, and He (1972). The word “body” is recorded in the third section “Humanity”: No.265, ♂ /gv|/. The word “hair” is recorded in the ninth section “Food”: No.1321, ✿, /ts‘ɛ́|/ or /kv|ts‘ɛ́|. Cf. Li, Zhang, and He (ibid., pp. 25, 103). In contrast, “head” is a basic pictograph, incorporating “ear” and “nose” in Zamblera’s plate. The other twenty-five radicals

<footnote n="12">12. Excerpt from Zamblera’s text: “A. Man and his Occupations (4); B. Woman and her Occupations (4); C. Anthropomorphic Deities (16); D. Parts of the Human Body (15); E. Mammals (30); F. Parts of Mammals (66); G. Birds (11); H. Parts of Birds (22); I. Amphibious, Reptiles, etc. (16); K. Fish and Parts of Fish (1); L. Invertebrates and lesser Animals (12); M. Trees and Plants (20); N. Sky, Earth, Water (31); O. Buildings, Parts of Buildings (13); P. Ships and Parts of Ships (1); Q. Domestics and Funerary Furniture (4); R. Temple Furniture and Sacred Emblems (14); S. Crowns, Dress, Staves, etc. (10); T. Warfare, Hunting, Butchery (15); U. Agriculture, Crafts, and Proffessions (30); V. Rope, Fiber, Baskets, Bags, etc. (5); W. Vessels of Stone and Earthenware (4); X. Loaves and Cakes (6); Y. Writings, Games, Music (19); Z. Strokes, Signs derived from Tibetan, Chinese, Geba, etc., Geometrical Figures Circular, Rounded Curve, Triangle, Squared, Orthogonal (36).”</footnote>

<footnote n="13">13. P. He (2004) collected 1,000 commonly used Dongba glyphs, presented in 24 semantic categories. The twenty-four categories (and their English translations) of P. He (ibid.): weather 天象, seasons 时令, geography 地理, direction and position 方位, plants 植物, birds 鸟类, beasts 兽类, insects and others 虫鱼, domestic animals 畜禽, human body 人体类, family and people 人物类, behaviour 行为类, religion 宗教, gods and ghosts 神鬼, labour 劳作, food and kitchen equipment 餐饮, housing and village 房舍, clothes 服饰, war 战争, tools and wares 器物, culture 文艺, modify 形容, state 状态, numbers and others 数词和其他词. Dragan (2005) recorded 1803 Dongba pictograms and three Dongba manuscripts translated into Serbian and one Serbian poem translated into Dongba verses.</footnote>
not picked as basic pictographs in Zamblera's plate are not spotted in the character list of the Section D "Parts of Human Body" (Zamblera, 2018, pp. 56-59).<fnref n="14" />

Among the 38 radicals of body parts, six are "ligature radicals": “one eye (cl.),” “see,” < “tusk,” ≪ “molar,” ≪ “to think,” and ≪ “lung,” while the other 32 are simple pictograph radicals. The ligature radicals are semantically connected with their corresponding simpler pictograph radicals. For example, “one eye (cl.)” and “see” are related to → “eye,” “tusk” and “molar” are related to “mouth,” due to the shared form, while “to think” and “lung” are related to ⊏ “heart”.<fnref n="15" /> The additional dots in “to think” (compared to “heart”) are a commonly used indicator in Dongba writing, which means “something”. These ligatures are considered radicals because they are used repetitively as entities to represent a morpheme in ligatures or fixed-group glyphs.

Table 5 shows the two sets of radicals attested in the category of plants.<fnref n="16" /> The radicals in each line are semantically connected. There are 20 basic pictographs of trees and plants in Zamblera's categorization, while they are 49 in my analysis. These elicited glyphs can be classified into 11 groups, namely: “wood,” “tree,” “flower,” “seed,” “panicle,” “thorn,” “leaf,” “spicy (n.),” “vegetable,” “grass,” and “bamboo”.

The ligature radicals are highlighted in blue. For example, ☞ “liquid medicine” belongs to the radical ☞ “flower” and it appears as a component in several ligatures, such as ☞ “to give liquid medicine to spirits,” ☞ “to mix,” and ☞ “to separate the herb and poison”. Therefore, ☞ “liquid medicine” is picked out as a radical.

The two glyphs of “tree” and “firewood” are interchangeable, i.e., both ☞ and ☞ (ル) can mean “tree” or “firewood”. However, they should be distinct as two radicals. In the context of the form of a glyph, one pictograph is a tree standing and the other one is a tree lying. The glyphs containing these two components can be distinguished according to their pronunciations. Through a phonetic analysis, the meaning of the words, rather than the form of the components, will contribute to figure out the conditions of the “interchange” between these two pictographs.

Moreover, the glyph ☞ can be, in fact, analyzed as two radicals: ☞-1 “wood,” a general term for wooden objects; and ☞-2 “tree,” a general term for all kinds of trees. This divergence of the glyph “tree” is an addition to Zamblera’s list, aiming at a more precise semantic segmentation of the tree-related glyphs.

<footnote n="14">14. The Dongba font used in the article is BabelStone Naxi LLC (published in May 2017). URL: www.babelstone.co.uk.</footnote>

<footnote n="15">15. The glyph “mouth” is missing in the BabelStone Naxi LLC font list.</footnote>

<footnote n="16">16. “Z.” and “X.” represent the surnames of the authors, and “gl.” stands for “gloss”. The uncertain glosses are marked in grey.</footnote>
<table><tr><td>Z. —<br>X. ♀<br>gl. leaf</td><td>—<br>tobacco<br>leaf</td><td>—<br>soybean</td><td>—<br>hemp</td></tr><tr><td>Z. <br>X. <br>gl. cactus</td><td>—<br>zan�-<br>xyllum</td><td>—<br>ginger<sup>21</sup></td><td>—<br>garlic<sup>22</sup></td><td>—<br>perilla</td><td>—<br>prosperous</td></tr><tr><td>Z. ♀<br>X. ♀<br>gl. bracken</td><td>—<br>agar-agar</td><td>—<br>mushroom</td><td>—<br>melon</td><td>—<br>gourd</td><td>—<br>turnip<br>(veg-<br>etable)</td></tr><tr><td>Z. ♀<br>gl. grass<br>(gener-<br>ation;<br>time)</td><td>—<br>sabaigrass</td><td>—<br>mug wort</td><td>—<br>medick<br>(god<br>livestock;<br>livestock;<br>ruminant)</td><td>—<br>farges de-<br>of caisnea<br>fruit<sup>23</sup></td><td>—<br>[thatch]<br>creeping<br>wood<br>sorrel</td></tr><tr><td>Z. —<br>X. ♀<br>gl. branched<br>horsetail<br>[banana]</td><td>—<br>bamboo</td><td>—</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

The differences spotted in the two sets of radicals depend partially on whether to include the ligatures in the radical system or not, and are partially due to the format of the sources quoted for the elicitation of radicals. At the current stage, the author elicits repetitively-used ligatures as radicals for the semantic index of the Dongba Script database. Moreover, it is possible to highlight some features of these radicals helping to understand the early stages of logographic writing systems.

First among them is the variety in the form of a glyph. A word may be written through several variants. The word “rainbow” can be either written through a pictogram ☛, or ☞, which is with an additional component “ground” ( ground ) to indicate the location of a rainbow. It is also possible to use a phonetic loan to represent a radical. As attested in the category “Astronomy,” the radical “mushroom” ( 个 / mol / ) is an occasional substitution of the radical “sky” ( 雲 / mee / ), despite their different pronunciations: ☛ “a white chaos of the initial world” (No.19), ☞ “a black

<footnote n="21">21. “Ginger” is a homophonic word to “to throw”.</footnote>

<footnote n="22">22. “Garlic” is a homophonic word to “can” and “unit”.</footnote>

<footnote n="23">23. The glyph can be a phonetic loan of the word “time” (read as /dʒu³/).</footnote>