The grapheme as a universal basic unit of writing

References

• Berg, K. (2019). Die Graphematik der Morpheme im Deutschen und Englischen [The graphematics of morphemes in German and English]. Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110604856
   Google Scholar
• Berg, K., & Evertz, M. (2018). Graphematik – die Beziehung zwischen Sprache und Schrift [Graphematics – the relation between language and writing]. In S. Dipper, R. Klabunde, & W. Mihatsch (Eds.), Linguistik [Linguistics] (pp. 187–195). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-55589-7_10
   Google Scholar
• Berg, K., Primus, B., & Wagner, L. (2016). Buchstabenmerkmal, Buchstabe, Graphem [Letter feature, letter, grapheme]. In U. Domahs, & B. Primus (Eds.), Handbuch Laut, Gebärde, Buchstabe [Handbook sound, sign, letter] (pp. 337–355). Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110295993-019
   Google Scholar
• Bhuvaneshwari, B., & Padakannaya, P. (2014). Reading in Tamil: A more alphabetic and less syllabic akshara-based orthography. In H. Winskel, & P. Padakannaya (Eds.), South and Southeast Asian psycholinguistics (pp. 192–201). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Birk, E. (2013). Graphem [Grapheme]. In M. Neef, S. Sahel, & R. Weingarten (Eds.), Schriftlinguistik [Grapholinguistics]. Berlin: De Gruyter. Retrieved from https://www.degruyter.com/view/WSK/wsk_id_wsk_artikel_artikel_14530
   Google Scholar
• Brekle, H. (1995). Neues über Groß- und Kleinbuchstaben. Theoretische Begründung der Entwicklung der römischen Majuskelformen zur Minuskelschrift [Something new about uppercase and lowercase letters. Theoretical reasons for the development of Roman majuscule forms to minuscule script]. Linguistische Berichte, 155, 3–21.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, J.-Y., & Cherng, R.-J. (2013). The proximate unit in Chinese handwritten character production. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(517), doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00517
   Google Scholar
• Coulmas, F. (1996). Typology of writing systems. In H. Günther, & O. Ludwig (Eds.), Writing and its use (pp. 1380–1387). Berlin: De Gruyter. doi:10.1515/978 3110147445.2.9.1380
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, P. T. (1991). Is a structural graphemics possible? LACUS Forum, 18, 528–537.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, P. T. (2017). Writing systems. In M. Aronoff & J. Rees-Miller (Eds.), The handbook of linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 75–94). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781119072 256.ch5
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, P. T. (2018). An exploration of writing. Bristol: Equinox.
   Google Scholar
• DeFrancis, J. (1989). Visible speech: The diverse oneness of writing systems. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dehaene, S. (2009). Reading in the brain: The new science of how we read. London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Dürscheid, C. (2016). Einführung in die Schriftlinguistik [Introduction to Grapholinguistics] (5th ed.). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
   Google Scholar
• Evertz, M. (2016). Graphematischer Fuß und graphematisches Wort [Graphematic foot and graphematic word]. In U. Domahs, & B. Primus (Eds.), Handbuch Laut, Gebärde, Buchstabe [Handbook sound, sign, letter] (pp. 377–397). Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110295993-021
   Google Scholar
• Evertz, M. (2018). Visual prosody: The graphematic foot in English and German. Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110583441
   Google Scholar
• Fedorova, L. (2013). The development of graphic representation in abugida writing: The akshara’s grammar. Lingua Posnaniensis, 55(2), 49–66. doi: 10.2478/linpo-2013-0013
   Google Scholar
• Fuhrhop, N. (2008). Das graphematische Wort (im Deutschen): Eine erste Annäherung [The graphematic word (in German): a first approach]. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 27(2), 189–228. doi: 10.1515/zfsw.2008.010
   Google Scholar
• Fuhrhop, N., & Buchmann, F. (2009). Die Längenhierarchie: Zum Bau der graphematischen Silbe [The length hierarchy: on the structure of the graphematic syllable]. Linguistische Berichte, 218, 127–155.
   Google Scholar
• Fuhrhop, N., & Peters, J. (2013). Einführung in die Phonologie und Graphematik [Introduction to phonology and graphematics]. Metzler: Stuttgart.
   Google Scholar
• Fuhrhop, N., & Schmidt, K. (2014). Die zunehmende Profilierung der Schreibsilbe in der Geschichte des Deutschen [The increasing profiling of the written syllable in the history of German]. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur, 136(4), 538–568. doi: 10.1515/bgsl-2014-0047
   Google Scholar
• Gallmann, P. (1985). Graphische Elemente der geschriebenen Sprache: Grundlagen für eine Reform der Orthographie [Graphic elements of written language: foundations for an orthography reform]. Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783111630380
   Google Scholar
• Garbe, B. (1985). Graphemtheorien und mögliche strukturmodelle zur beschreibung der orthographie [Grapheme theories and possible structural models for the description of orthography]. In G. Augst (Ed.), Graphematik und Orthographie [Graphematics and orthography] (pp. 1–21). Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Gelb, I. J. (1969). A study of writing (2nd ed., 3rd impression). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Glück, H. (2016). Graphem [Grapheme]. In H. Glück & M. Rödel (Eds.), Metzler Lexikon Sprache [Metzler encyclopedia language] (5th ed., pp. 252–253). Stuttgart: Metzler.
   Google Scholar
• Gnanadesikan, A. E. (2017). Towards a typology of phonemic scripts. Writing Systems Research, 9(1), 14–35. doi: 10.1080/17586801.2017.1308239
   Google Scholar
• Günther, H. (1988). Schriftliche Sprache: Strukturen geschriebener Wörter und ihre Verarbeitung beim Lesen [Written language: structures of written words and their processing during reading]. Berlin: De Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110935851.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, R. (1994). Semiotic aspects of writing. In H. Günther, & O. Ludwig (Eds.), Writing and its use (pp. 41–48). Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110111293.1.1.41
   Google Scholar
• Harris, R. (2005). Schrift und linguistische Theorie [Writing and linguistic theory]. In G. Grube, W. Kogge, & S. Krämer (Eds.), Schrift: Kulturtechnik zwischen Auge, Hand und Maschine [Writing: cultural technique between eye, hand, and machine] (pp. 61–80). München: Wilhelm Fink.
   Google Scholar
• Haspelmath, M. (2010). Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language, 86(3), 663–687. doi: 10.1353/lan.2010.0021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Häffner, S. (2009). Universalien der Schrift und Schriftverarbeitung: zu den schrifttheoretischen Prämissen psychologischer Lesemodelle [Universals of writing and the processing of writing: on the grapholinguistic premises of psychological models of reading]. Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Heller, K. (1980). Zum Graphembegriff [On the notion grapheme]. In D. Nerius, & J. Scharnhorst (Eds.), Theoretische Probleme der deutschen Orthographie [Theoretical problems of German orthography] (pp. 74–108). Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, L. (1985). On the use of the term ‘grapheme’. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1(2), 135–148. doi: 10.1080/01690968508402075
   Google Scholar
• Herrick, E. M. (1974). A taxonomy of alphabets and scripts. Visible Language, 8(1), 5–32.
   Google Scholar
• Herrick, E. M. (1994). Of course a structural graphemics is possible! LACUS Forum, 21, 413–424.
   Google Scholar
• Ho, C. S.-H., & Bryant, P. (1997). Learning to read Chinese beyond the logographic phase. Reading Research Quarterly, 32(3), 276–289. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.32.3.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ho, C. S.-H., Ng, T.-T., & Ng, W.-K. (2003). A ‘radical’ approach to reading development in Chinese: The role of semantic radicals and phonetic radicals. Journal of Literacy Research, 35(3), 849–878. doi: 10.1207/s15548430jlr3503_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holenstein, E. (1983). Double articulation in writing. In F. Coulmas, & K. Ehlich (Eds.), Writing in focus (pp. 45–62). Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110822830.45
   Google Scholar
• Klinkenberg, J.-M., & Polis, S. (2018). On scripturology. Signata: Annals of Semiotics, 9, 57–102.
   Google Scholar
• Kohrt, M. (1985). Problemgeschichte des Graphembegriffs und des frühen Phonembegriffs [History of the notion grapheme and the early notion of phoneme]. Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783111371207
   Google Scholar
• Kohrt, M. (1986). The term ‘grapheme’ in the history and theory of linguistics. In G. Augst (Ed.), New trends in graphemics and orthography (pp. 80–96). Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110867329.80
   Google Scholar
• Krämer, S. (2003). ›Schriftbildlichkeit‹ oder: Über eine (fast) vergessene Dimension der Schrift [›Imagery of writing‹ or: on a(n almost) forgotten dimension of writing]. In S. Krämer, & H. Bredekamp (Eds.), Bild, Schrift, Zahl [Image, writing, number] (pp. 157–176). München: Wilhelm Fink.
   Google Scholar
• Ladd, D. R. (2014). Simultaneous structure in phonology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lindqvist, C. (2001). Skandinavische Schriftsysteme im Vergleich [Scandinavian writing systems in comparison]. Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110927085
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood, D. G. (2001). Phoneme and grapheme: How parallel can they be? LACUS Forum, 27, 307–316.
   Google Scholar
• Meletis, D. (2015). Graphetik: Form und Materialität von Schrift [Graphetics: form and materiality of writing]. Glückstadt: Werner Hülsbusch.
   Google Scholar
• Meletis, D. (2017). Review of Handbuch Laut, Gebärde, Buchstabe, ed. by U. Domahs & B. Primus. Zeitschrift für Rezensionen zur germanistischen Sprachwissenschaft, 9(1-2), 109–115. doi: 10.1515/zrs-2017-0019
   Google Scholar
• Meletis, D. (2018). What is natural in writing? Prolegomena to a Natural Grapholinguistics. Written Language and Literacy, 21(1), 52–88. doi: 10.1075/wll.00010.mel
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meletis, D. (2019). Naturalness in scripts and writing systems: Outlining a Natural Grapholinguistics (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Graz.
   Google Scholar
• Mugdan, J. (1990). On the history of linguistic terminology. In H.-J. Niederehe, & E. F. K. Koerner (Eds.), History and historiography of linguistics: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on the history of the language sciences (ICHoLS IV), Trier, 24–28 August 1987, Vol. 1: Antiquity–17th century (pp. 49–62). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/sihols.51.1.09mug
   Google Scholar
• Myers, J. (2019). The grammar of Chinese characters: Productive knowledge of formal patterns in an orthographic system. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Neef, M. (2005). Die Graphematik des Deutschen [The graphematics of German]. Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110914856
   Google Scholar
• Neef, M. (2015). Writing systems as modular objects: Proposals for theory design in grapholinguistics. Open Linguistics, 1, 708–721. doi: 10.1515/opli-2015-0026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nöth, W. (1990). Handbook of semiotics. Indiana, IN: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Patel, P. G. (2010). The Brāhmī writing system: Cross-fertilizing epigraphy, archaeology and linguistics. New Delhi: Black & White.
   Google Scholar
• Primus, B. (2003). Zum Silbenbegriff in der Schrift-, Laut- und Gebärdensprache – Versuch einer mediumübergreifenden Fundierung [On the notion of syllable in written, spoken and sign language – attempt at a cross-medium basis]. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 23(1), 3–55. doi: 10.1515/zfsw.2003.22.1.3
   Google Scholar
• Primus, B. (2004). A featural analysis of the modern Roman alphabet. Written Language and Literacy, 7(2), 235–274. doi: 10.1075/wll.7.2.06pri
   Google Scholar
• Primus, B. (2006). Buchstabenkomponenten und ihre Grammatik [Components of letters and their grammar]. In U. Bredel, & G. Hartmut (Eds.), Orthographietheorie und Rechtschreibunterricht [Orthographic theory and spelling instruction] (pp. 5–43). Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110921199.5
   Google Scholar
• Primus, B. (2010). Strukturelle Grundlagen des deutschen Schriftsystems [Structural basics of the German writing system]. In U. Bredel, A. Müller, & G. Hinney (Eds.), Schriftsystem und Schrifterwerb: Linguistisch – didaktisch – empirisch [Writing system and literacy acquisition: linguistically, didactically, empirically] (pp. 9–46). Berlin: De Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110232257.9
   Google Scholar
• Qiu, X. (2000). Chinese writing. ( G. L. Mattos, & J. Norman, Trans.). Berkeley, CA: The Society for the Study of Early China.
   Google Scholar
• Rezec, O. (2009). Zur Struktur des deutschen Schriftsystems [On the structure of the German writing system] (Doctoral dissertation). University of Munich. Retrieved from https://edoc.ub.uni-muenchen.de/10730/
   Google Scholar
• Rezec, O. (2013). Ein differenzierteres Strukturmodell des deutschen Schriftsystems [A more differentiated structural model of the German writing system]. Linguistische Berichte, 234, 227–254.
   Google Scholar
• Rizza, A. (2018, November). Recurring problems in the application of the term/concept grapheme: reflecting again. Paper presented at the LSS München/Graphematik-Tagung des Akademieprojekts RuneS “Wege zur Konfiguration der Zeichen-Phonem-Beziehung”, Munich, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, H. (2005). Writing systems: A linguistic approach. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Saiegh-Haddad, E. & Henkin-Roitfarb, R. (2014). The structure of Arabic language and or­tho­graphy. In E. Saiegh-Haddad, & R. Malatesha Joshi (Eds.), Handbook of Arabic literacy: Insights and perspectives (pp. 3–28). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-8545-7_1
   Google Scholar
• Salomon, R. (2007). Typological observations on the Indic scripts and their relationship with other alphasyllburies [sic]. In P. G. Patel, P. Pandey, & D. Rajgor (Eds.), The Indic scripts: Palaeographic and linguistic perspectives (pp. 25–43). New Delhi: D. K. Printworld.
   Google Scholar
• Sampson, G. (1994). Chinese script and the diversity of writing systems. Linguistics, 32(1), 117–132. doi: 10.1515/ling.1994.32.1.117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sampson, G. (2015). Writing systems: A linguistic introduction (2nd ed). Bristol: Equinox.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, K. (2016). Der graphematische Satz: Vom Schreibsatz zur allgemeinen Satzvorstellung [The graphematic sentence: from the sentence in writing to a general notion of sentence]. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik, 44(2), 215–256. doi: 10.1515/zgl-2016-0011
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, K. (2018). Phonographie und Morphographie im Deutschen. Grundzüge einer wortbasierten Graphematik [Phonography and Morphography in German: basics of a word-based graphematics]. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
   Google Scholar
• Share, D. L., & Daniels, P. T. (2016). Aksharas, alphasyllabaries, abugidas, alphabets and orthographic depth: Reflections on Rimzhim, Katz and Fowler (2014). Writing Systems Research, 8(1), 17–31. doi: 10.1080/17586801.2015.1016395
   Google Scholar
• Sproat, R. (2000). A computational theory of writing systems. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taha, H. Y. (2013). Reading and spelling in Arabic: Linguistic and orthographic complexity. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(5), 721–727. doi: 10.4304/tpls.3.5.721-727
   Google Scholar
• Valkama, M. (2017, August). How to segment writing into comparable units? Paper presented at the 11th International AWLL Workshop, Nagoya, Japan. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/34468726/How_to_segment_writing_into_comparable_units_11th_AWLL_workshop_Nagoya_29.8.2017_.
   Google Scholar
• Waller, R. H. W. (1991). Typography and discourse. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson & P. Rosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, (Vol. 2, pp. 341–380). New York: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Weingarten, R. (2011). Comparative graphematics. Written Language and Literacy, 14(1), 12–38. doi: 10.1075/wll.14.1.02wei
   Google Scholar
• Winskel, H., & Iemwanthong, K. (2010). Reading and spelling acquisition in Thai children. Reading and Writing, 23(9), 1021–1053. doi: 10.1007/s11145-009-9194-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar