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. 303–335

Brahmi’s children

Variation and stability in a script family

A survey of modern descendants of Brahmi shows that the letter forms and various other features of the scripts vary, but the use of an inherent vowel and of dependent, satellite signs for other vowels is remarkably stable. Comparison is made to other scripts invented in the same geographic region, Thaana and Sorang Sompeng, and to the Arabic script as used in Arabic, Persian, Sorani Kurdish, Uyghur, and Kashmiri. Arabic scripts maintain uniform letter forms but vary considerably in their treatment of vowels. Cultural factors may explain the visual diversity of Brahmic scripts as compared to Arabic scripts. The stable combination of inherent vowel and satellite vowels derives from the decodability of simple aksharas into pronounceable syllabic units in the acquisition of reading. This akshara advantage is related to the psychological grain size theory of reading, with the additional claim that the syllable has special status because it is pronounceable.
Keywords: Brahmi, Devanagari, akshara, inherent vowel, Arabic script, alphasyllabary, script evolution, script typology, syllables, psychological grain size theory
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Devanagari: An example of a Brahmic script
  • 3.Scope of the survey
  • 4.Results of the survey
    • 4.1Universal or nearly universal elements
    • 4.2Common elements
    • 4.3Highly variable features
    • 4.4Rare features
    • 4.5Summary of results
  • 5.Comparison 1: Other South Asian inventions
  • 6.Comparison 2: Arabic scripts
    • 6.1Analysis of Arabic descendants
    • 6.2Differences between Brahmic and Arabic scripts
  • 7.Reasons for Brahmic stability and diversity
    • 7.1Reasons for stability
    • 7.2Reasons for diversity
  • 8.The akshara advantage
    • 8.1Analytical units
    • 8.2Learnable units
    • 8.3Origin of the inherent vowel
    • 8.4Tradeoffs
    • 8.5Psychological grain size theory
  • 9.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 21 January 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.00057.gna
References (65)
References
Asfaha, Yonas Mesfun, Jeanne Kurvers & Sjaak Kroon. (2009). Grain size in script and teaching: Literacy acquisition in Ge’ez and Latin. Applied Psycholinguistics 301: 709–724. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bagchi, Tista. (1996). Bengali writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 399–403.Google Scholar
Bardwaj, Mangat Rai. (2016). Panjabi: A comprehensive grammar. Abingdon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bashir, Elena, Thomas J. Conners, & Brook Hefright. (2019). A descriptive grammar of Hindko, Panjabi, and Saraiki. Berlin: De Gruyter-Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Thomas. (1996). Arabic writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 559–564. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bright, William. (1996a). The Devanagari script. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 384–390.Google Scholar
. (1996b). Kannada and Telugu writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 413–425.Google Scholar
. (1999). A matter of typology: Alphasyllabaries and abugidas. Written Language & Literacy 2(1): 45–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, MacAlister & Joseph J. Zasloff. (1977). Laos 1976: Faltering first steps toward socialism. Asian Survey 17(2): 107–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cholin, Joana. (2011). Do syllables exist? Psycholinguistic evidence for the retrieval of syllabic units in speech production. In Charles E. Cairns & Eric Raimy (eds.), Handbook of the syllable, 225–253. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Coetzee, Andries. (2011). Syllables in speech processing: Evidence from perceptual epenthesis. In Charles E. Cairns & Eric Raimy (eds.), Handbook of the syllable, 295–328. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Coulson, Michael. (1976). Sanskrit: An introduction to the classical language. Oxford: Hodder and Stoughton.Google Scholar
Court, Christopher. (1996). The spread of Brahmi script into Southeast Asia. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 445–449.Google Scholar
Daniels, Peter T. (1996a). The study of writing systems. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 3–20.Google Scholar
(1996b). The invention of writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 579–586.Google Scholar
(2018). An exploration of writing. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
(2019). Indic scripts: History, typology, study. In R. Malatesha Joshi & Catherine McBride (eds.), Handbook of literacy in akshara orthography, 11–42. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daniels, Peter T. & William Bright (eds.). (1996). The world’s writing systems. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Diller, Anthony. (1996). Thai and Lao writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 457–466.Google Scholar
Elliott, Christine. (2012). Second language writing system word recognition (with a focus on Lao). Journal of the National Council of Less Commonly Taught Languages 20121: 53–73.Google Scholar
Gair, James W. (1996). Sinhala writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 408–412.Google Scholar
Gill, Harjeet Singh. (1996). The Gurmukhi script. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 395–398.Google Scholar
Gleitman, Lila R. & Paul Rozin. (1973). Teaching reading by use of a syllabary. Reading Research Quarterly 8(4): 447–483. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gnanadesikan, Amalia E. (2011). Syllables and syllabaries: What writing systems tell us about syllable structure. In Charles E. Cairns & Eric Raimy (eds.), Handbook of the Syllable, 397–414. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
(2012). Maldivian Thaana, Japanese kana, and the representation of moras in writing. Writing Systems Research 41: 91–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). Towards a typology of phonemic scripts. Writing Systems Research 9(1): 14–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goswami, Usha. (2006). Orthography, phonology, and reading development: A cross-linguistic perspective. In R. Malatesha Joshi & P. G. Aaron (eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy, 463–480. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hosking, R. F. & G. M. Meredith-Owens. (1966). A handbook of Asian scripts. London: British Museum.Google Scholar
Justeson, John S. & Laurence D. Stephens. (1993). The evolution of syllabaries from alphabets: transmission, language contrast, and script typology. Die Sprache 35(1): 2–46.Google Scholar
Kandhadai, Padmapriya & Richard Sproat. (2010). Impact of spatial ordering of graphemes in alphasyllabic scripts on phonemic awareness in Indic languages. Writing Systems Research 2(2): 105–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaye, Alan S. (1996). Adaptations of Arabic script. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 743–762. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuipers, Joel C. & Ray McDermott. (1996). Insular Southeast Asian scripts. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 474–484.Google Scholar
Liberman, A. M., Cooper, F. S., Shankweiler, D. P., and Studdert-Kennedy, M. 1967. Perception of the speech code. Psychological Review 74 (6): 431–461. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mahapatra, B. P. (1996). Oriya writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 404–407.Google Scholar
Masica, Colin. (1991). The Indo-Aryan languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. (1996). South Asia: Coexistence of scripts. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 773–776.Google Scholar
McCarus, Ernest N. (2009). Kurdish. In Gernot Windfuhr (ed.), The Iranian Languages, 587–633. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mistry, P. J. (1996). Gujarati writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 391–394.Google Scholar
Mohamed, Naseema. (1999). Dhivehi writing systems. Malé: National Centre for Linguistic and Historical Research.Google Scholar
Mohanan, K. P. (1996). Malayalam writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 420–425.Google Scholar
Nag, Sonali. (2007). Early reading in Kannada: The pace of acquisition of orthographic knowledge and phonemic awareness. Journal of Research in Reading 30(1): 7–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2014). Akshara-phonology mappings: The common yet uncommon case of the consonant cluster. Writing Systems Research 61: 105–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ohala, Manjari. (1999). Hindi. In International Phonetic Association (ed.) Handbook of the International Phonetic Association: A guide to the use of the International Phonetic Alphabet, 100–103. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Piper, Benjamin & Agatha J. van Ginkel. (2017). Reading the script: How the scripts and writing systems of Ethiopian languages relate to letter and word identification. Writing Systems Research 91: 36–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prakash, P., D. Rekha, R. Nigam & P. Karanth. (1993). Phonological Awareness, Orthography, and Literacy. In Robert J. Scholes (ed.) Literacy and Language Analysis, 55–70. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Prakash, Anusha, Jeena J. Prakash & Hema A. Murthy. (2016). Acoustic analysis of syllables across Indian languages. INTERSPEECH: 327–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ratliff, Martha. (1996). The Pahawh Hmong script. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 619–624.Google Scholar
Rimzhim, Anurag, Leonard Katz & Carol A. Fowler. (2014). Brāhmī-derived orthographies are typologically āksharik but functionally predominantly alphabetic. Writing Systems Research, 61, 41–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salomon, Richard. (1995). On the origin of the early Indian scripts. Journal of the American Oriental Society 115(2): 271–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1996). Brahmi and Kharoshthi. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 373–383.Google Scholar
. (1998). Indian epigraphy: A guide to the study of inscriptions in Sanskrit, Prakrit, and the other Indo-Aryan languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sampson, Geoffrey. (2015). Writing systems. (2nd ed.) Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Schiller, Eric. (1996). Khmer writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 467–473.Google Scholar
Sproat, Richard. 2006. Brahmi-derived scripts, script layout, and segmental awareness. Written Language & Literacy 9(1): 45–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steever, Sanford B. (1996). Tamil writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 426–430.Google Scholar
Taylor, Insup & M. Martin Taylor. (2014). Writing and literacy in Chinese, Korean and Japanese. (Revised ed.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Third Resolution of the Party Central Committee. (1976). Translations in Southeast Asia 657. Joint Publications Research Service.Google Scholar
Unicode. (2004). Codes for the representation of names of scripts. ISO 15924 Code Lists. [URL]
Vaid, Jyotsna & Ashum Gupta. (2002). Exploring word recognition in a semi-alphabetic script: The case of Devanagari. Brain and Language 811: 679–690. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Kuijp, Leonard W. J. (1996). The Tibetan script and derivatives. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 431–441.Google Scholar
Weingarten, Rüdiger. (2011). Comparative graphematics. Written Language and Literacy 2011(1): 12–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wheatley, Julian K. (1996). Burmese writing. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 450–456.Google Scholar
Windfuhr, Gernot & John R. Perry. (2009). Persian and Tajik. In Gernot Windfuhr (ed.), 2009. The Iranian languages, 416–544. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Zide, Norman. (1996). Scripts for Munda languages. In Daniels & Bright (1996), 612–618.Google Scholar
Ziegler, Johannes C. & Usha Goswami. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: a psycholinguistic grain size theory. Psychological Bulletin 131(1): 2–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Vasudevan, Nirmala, Mithun Haridas, Prema Nedungadi, Raghu Raman, Peter T. Daniels & David L. Share
2024. A multi-dimensional framework for characterizing the role of writing system variation in literacy learning: a case study in Malayalam. Reading and Writing 37:3 ► pp. 581 ff. DOI logo
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.