Research themes
Graphemics
Home
Introduction
Highlights
Comparative Graphemic Analysis (1979)
Ebla Graphemics 1 (1982)
Introduction to the Middle Assyrian Laws (1984)
Introduction
Concentrating on the structure of verbal expression as transmitted in writing, I have sought to articulate clearly the inner relationships of linguistic elements within Akkadian (and to a limited extent Amorite). The pay dirt, so to speak, of this effort is to develop a sensitivity for a fuller resonance of the texts.
The logical starting point has been graphemics, which is especially important in the case of a language, such as ours, for which there are no living informants (a "dead" language).
Back to top
Highlights
The correlation of language to its written counterpart is particularly significant with the cuneiform writing system, because of the complexity of the graphic inventory and the multiplicity of values that individual signs have. Graphemics emerges therefore as an indispensable intellectual tool.
I have argued for a more rigorous definition of the term than was usually the case in Assyriology, and have provided a thorough discussion of concepts and correlative terms (1982, 1984).
Conceptually, the listing by triads (see especially 1984) is the most significant in that it provides the parameters within which polyvalence is practically eliminated. Thus the sign #366 is read as šaṭ in the sequence #366 #068 #318, but as kur in the sequence #366 #457 #212 (p.62).
The sorting by triads is important philologically as well, because it shows possible contexts within which signs in a broken environment may be better understood and plausible restorations may be more easily sugegsted for the missing portion of the text.
Also conceptually significant is the concept of graphemic profile, i.e., a bar histogram arrangement of sign values listed according to frequency (1979, 1984): this allows a detailed graphic comparison among corpora.
Back to top
Comparative Graphemic Analysis (1979)
In 1979, five corpora are analyzed, for a total of 2195 texts and 351,091 cuneiform signs. Each corpus is relatively homogeneous within itself, but there are otherwise two major groups, Old Babylonian and Western Akkadian: this allows for a meaningful distributional analysis. The inventory overlay (shown with detailed charts) shows that: the total number of signs within any given corpus; half of the signs are shared by all corpora; one fifth is found only in individual corpora; about 10% of the signs are "frequent" in each corpus (between 1% and 6% of the total sig inventory).
It is suggested that this is indicative "of a basic intrinsic trait of the cuneiform system, which keeps the system working within a certain balance of frequency ranges. There is a certain dynamism, as it were, which is operative within the system as such; it may be characterized as having a centrifugal force, which favors, up to a point, the utilization of uncommon signs, but this trend is at the same time mitigated by a centripetal force which precludes an excessive diversification" (p. 92).
The concept of "graphemic profile" is introduced (pp. 92 f.), which reproduces graphically the ranges of infidivual signs: thus the sign A is the most common in each of the five corpora, whereas MA is more frequent in Old Babylonian than in Western Akkadian. It is stressed that the judicious use of large inventories and attendant statistics is fundamental for a proper distibutional analysis to be effective.
Back to top
Ebla Graphemics 1 (1982)
In 1982, the following topics are discussed. 1. The Theory of Graphemics. –A thorough presentation of concepts and definitions, highlighting in the first place the proper meaning of "graphemics" as a system that "includes all correlations between signs and the phonemic system" (p. 40). The term "graphetics" is introduced (as a parallel to "phonetics) to define the system of signs sorted according to either formal or abstrlogical criteria (graphics vs. paleography). The concepts of allography and orthography are also explained.
The concept of graphemic rule is then discussed, the most important aspect being that sign polyvalence is heavily conditioned by graphemic clustering. This leads to a review of the standard Assyriological system of transliteration: the proliferation of values results from the attempt to embed graphemic rules in the notation of each value, while the use of "simple" values means that these are seen as symbols for sets of values (p. 46 f.). Standard transliteration is thus a hybrid notational system, where values may or may not include an explicit rendering of implicit rules. Comparing other similar cases (e.g.: "we cannot load all grammatical rules onto the lexicon," p. 48), a case is made for the usefulness of transcription as the system that render the phonemic reading intended by the graphemic embodiment.
There is a major advantage in applying these principles to a vast body of data, such as large corpora of cuneiform texts (Ebla and beyond): distributional and structural analysis rests thereby on safe ground because of the vastness of the inventory.
2. The Practice of Graphemic Analysis.
Back to top
Introduction to the Middle Assyrian Laws (1984)
This volume gives in book format a variety of sorts applied to a relatively limited corpus. As such, the value is methodological more than documentary. [For the limitations inherent in a paper publication of this kind of data, see the remarks under the heading of Digital analysis.] The introduction gives details on the approach followed and the results obtained.
1. Organization of the data. – This section describes in detail the five different display modes of the data as given in printed format in the book (shown graphically on pp. 4-5). There are two main types, indices (with limited or no context) and concordances (with extended context).
The sign index and the sign concordance list the signs in "triads," i.e., a sequence of three signs, sorted in the numeric sequence where each number represents the standard Assyriological equivalent of a given cuneiform sign.
The first consists of indices (elements without context), of which two are by cuneiform sign (
2. Graphemic analysis. –
Back to top
|