Cover not available
Article published In:
Diversity in Writing Systems: Embracing multiple perspectives
Edited by Amalia E. Gnanadesikan and Anna P. Judson
[Written Language & Literacy 24:2] 2021
► pp. 171–197

<Th>e ubi<qu>ity of polygra<ph>y and its significan<ce> for <th>e typology of <wr>iti<ng> systems

| Ruhr University Bochum
| Ruhr University Bochum
It has often been assumed that there is, or should be, a one-to-one correspondence between graphs and linguistic units in writing systems as the norm. This is not merely doubtful in terms of descriptive accuracy. Conceptualizing writing systems in such a way also has profound consequences for the application of typological categories to specific cases. In this paper we first suggest a working definition of polygraphy, also touching upon its demarcation from adjacent concepts such as ligatures and diacritics. Having demonstrated that polygraphy is in fact fundamental to a significant number of typologically diverse writing systems, we argue in favor of a typology of writing systems taking the ubiquity of polygraphy into due account, with definitions going beyond one-to-one correspondences as the default.
Keywords: typology of writing systems, polygraphy, polygraphs, digraphs, diacritics, ligatures
Article outline
  • 1.The origins of polygraphs
  • 2.The ideal of one-to-one correspondences
  • 3.The ubiquity of polygraphy in writing systems
    • 3.1Polygraphy in segmental systems
    • 3.2Polygraphy in syllabic systems
    • 3.3Polygraphy in morphographic systems
  • 4.Transparency of polygraphs
  • 5.Analysis of writing systems vs. analysis of language
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 21 January 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.00052.ost
References (65)
References
Adam, Isabell. (2014). Digraph. In Martin Neef, Rüdiger Weingarten & Said Sahel (eds.), Schriftlinguistik. Berlin: De Gruyter. [URL]
Bailey, Nathan. (1730). Dictionarium Britannicum: Or a More Compleat Universal Etymological English Dictionary Than Any Extant. London: T. Cox.Google Scholar
Bloch, Bernard. (1950). Studies in Colloquial Japanese IV: Phonemics. Language 26.1: 86–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brooks, Greg. (2015). Dictionary of the British English Spelling System. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carney, Edward. (2012). A Survey of English Spelling. London, New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chao, Yuen Ren. (1968). Language and Symbolic Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chen, Liwei. (2003). Nitchū ryōgengo-no kōshō-ni miru jukujikun-no keisei. Kokugogaku 54.3: 30–43. [URL]
Colomo, Katarina. (2013). Mehrgraph. In Martin Neef, Rüdiger Weingarten & Said Sahel (eds.), Schriftlinguistik. Berlin: De Gruyter. [URL]
Coulmas, Florian. (1996). The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Writing Systems. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. (2003). Writing Systems. An Introduction to their Linguistic Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Daniels, Peter T. (1990). Fundamentals of Grammatology. Journal of the American Oriental Society 110.4: 727–731. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006). On beyond alphabets. Written Language & Literacy 9.1: 7–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). An exploration of writing. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Daniels, Peter T. & William Bright (eds.) (1996). The World’s Writing Systems. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
DeFrancis, John. (1989). Visible Speech: The Diverse Oneness of Writing Systems. Honolulu: Hawaii University Press.Google Scholar
Diller, Anthony. (1996). Thai and Lao Writing. In Peter T. Daniels & William Bright (eds.), The World’s Writing Systems, 457–466. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Du Halde, Jean-Baptiste. (1736). The General History of China, vol. 21. London: Watts.Google Scholar
Gallmann, Peter. (1986). The graphic elements of German written language. In Gerhard Augst (ed.), New Trends in Graphemics and Orthography, 43–79. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gnanadesikan, Amalia E. (2009). The Writing Revolution. Cuneiform to the Internet. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
(2012). Maldivian Thaana, Japanese kana, and the representation of moras in writing. Writing Systems Research 4.1: 91–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). Towards a typology of phonemic scripts. Writing Systems Research 9.1: 14–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haarmann, Harald. (1989). Symbolic Values of Foreign Language Use. From the Japanese Case to a General Sociolinguistic Perspective. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haas, W. (1976). Writing: The basic options. In W. Haas (ed.), Writing without letters, 131–208. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Handel, Zev. (2015). Logography and the classification of writing systems: A response to Unger. Scripta 71: 109–150.Google Scholar
Hill, Archibald A. (1967). The typology of writing systems. In William M. Austin (ed.), Papers in Linguistics in Honor of Léon Dostert, 92–99. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Honda, Keisuke. (2007). Kana digraphs and morae. A structural analysis. Written Language & Literacy 10.1: 65–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2011). On the moraic nature of hiragana and katakana. Tsukuba ōyō gengogaku kenkyū 181: 33–46. [URL]
. (2019). What Do Kanji Graphs Represent in the Current Japanese Writing system? Towards a Unified Model of Kanji as Written Signs. In Yannis Haralambous (ed.), Graphemics in the 21st Century. Brest, June 13–15, 2018. Proceedings, 185–208. Brest: Fluxus Editions. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joyce, Terry. (2011). The significance of the morphographic principle for the classification of writing systems. Written Language & Literacy 14.1: 58–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kabashima, Tadao. (1977). Moji-no taikei-to kōzō. In Ōno Susumu & Shibata Takeshi (eds.), Iwanami kōza Nihongo, vol. 8: Moji, 23–60. Tōkyō: Iwanami shoten.Google Scholar
. (1979). Nihon-no moji: hyōki taikei-o kangaeru. Tōkyō: Iwanami shoten.Google Scholar
Kindaichi, Haruhiko. (1950). ‘Gooku’ to ‘gōku’: hiki-onsetsu-no teishō. Kokugo-to kokubungaku 27.1: 46–59.Google Scholar
Kircher, Athanasius. (1667). China monumentis […] illustrata. Amsterdam: Meurs.Google Scholar
Kirkby, John. (1746). A New English Grammar, or, Guide to the English Tongue. London: R. Manby and H. S. Cox.Google Scholar
Kurzon, Dennis. (2008). A brief note on diacritics. Written Language & Literacy 11.1: 90–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, Ki-Moon & S. Robert Ramsey. (2011). A History of the Korean Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matsunaga, Sachiko. (1996). The Linguistic Nature of Kanji Reexamined: Do Kanji Represent Only Meanings?. The Journal of the Association of Teachers of Japanese 30.2: 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meletis, Dimitrios. (2015). Graphetik. Form und Materialität von Schrift. Glückstadt: Hülsbusch. [URL]
. (2019). The grapheme as a universal basic unit of writing. Writing Systems Research 11.1: 26–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neef, Martin. (2004). The relation of vowel letters to phonological syllables in English and German. Written Language & Literacy 7.2: 205–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nguyễn, Đình-Hòa. (1996). Vietnamese. In Peter T. Daniels & William Bright (eds.), The World’s Writing Systems, 691–695. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Poser, William J. (1992). The Structural Typology of Phonological Writing. Handout for a presentation to the Linguistic Society of America, Philadelphia, January 12, 1992.
(2004). Phonological Writing and Phonological Representation. Handout for a presentation given at Harvard University, December 10, 2004.
Ratcliffe, Robert R. (2001). What do “phonemic” writing systems represent?: Arabic Huruuf, Japanese Kana, and the Moraic Principle. Written Language & Literacy 4.1: 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rickmeyer, Jens. (2014). Japanische Morphosyntax. Second, revised edition. Tübingen: Edition Julius Groos im Stauffenburg-Verlag.Google Scholar
Rogers, Henry. (2005). Writing Systems. A Linguistic Approach. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sampson, Geoffrey. (1985). Writing Systems. A Linguistic Introduction. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
. (2015). Writing Systems. Second edition. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Schäfer, Roland. (2018). Einführung in die grammatische Beschreibung des Deutschen. Third, revised edition. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sproat, Richard. (2000). A Computational Theory of Writing Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. (2013). A note on Unger’s ‘What linguistic units do Chinese characters represent?’. Written Language & Literacy 16.1: 107–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sweet, Henry. (1877). A Handbook of Phonetics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Tranter, Nicolas. (2013). Logography and layering: A functional cross-linguistic analysis. Written Language & Literacy 16.1: 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Unger, J. Marshall. (2011). What linguistic units do Chinese characters represent?. Written Language & Literacy 14.2: 293–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2014). Empirical Evidence and the Typology of Writing Systems: A Response to Handel. Scripta 61: 75–95.Google Scholar
. (2016). Avoiding Circularity: A Response to Handel. Scripta 81: 87–100.Google Scholar
Vachek, Josef. (1959). Two chapters on written English. Brno Studies in English 11: 7–38. [URL]
Vance, Timothy J. (1987). An Introduction to Japanese Phonology. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
(2008). The Sounds of Japanese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2014). What Students of Japanese Can Learn from Akkadian Cuneiform. Japanese Language and Literature 48.2: 341–379. [URL]
van der Kuijp, Leonard W. J. (1996). The Tibetan Script and Derivatives. In Peter T. Daniels & William Bright (eds.), The World’s Writing Systems, 431–441. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Venezky, Richard L. (2004). In search of the perfect orthography. Written Language & Literacy 7.2: 139–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Webb, John. (1669). An Historical Essay Endeavoring a Probability that the Language of the Empire of China is the Primitive Language. London: Brook.Google Scholar
Wenck, Günther. (1959). Japanische Phonetik, vol. 4: Erscheinungen und Probleme des japanischen Lautwandels. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
. (1966). The Phonemics of Japanese. Questions and Attempts. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Iyengar, Arvind
2023. More matters of typology. Written Language & Literacy 26:1 ► pp. 30 ff. DOI logo
Osterkamp, Sven & Gordian Schreiber
2023. A proposal for a formalized, expandable approach to the taxonomy of writing systems. Written Language & Literacy 26:1 ► pp. 5 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.