Sequoyah’s syllabary created a written language for the Cherokee

Cherokee Syllabary & Historical Context

• Wikipedia links on the Cherokee syllabary are shared; commenters note that by 1825 most Cherokees could reportedly read/write it.
• Comparisons are made to rapid literacy in 19th‑century Hawaiʻi after missionaries introduced an alphabet.
• There is disagreement over whether Sequoyah was truly monolingual Cherokee:
  • One side repeats the “monolingual” narrative.
  • Others argue this is doubtful, citing his European parentage, military service, trade contacts, and the clear visual borrowing from Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and Cyrillic letterforms.
• The story that contemporaries saw his writing as “magic” is tied to unfamiliarity with writing and led to a witchcraft trial, though records are lacking.

Writing Systems, Phonetics, and English Orthography

• Commenters contrast a purpose-built syllabary’s phonetic simplicity with English’s irregular spelling.
• Discussion covers: loss of older English letters (þ, ð, long s, yogh), printing-press and typewriter influence, and how these technologies nudged but did not fully determine orthographic simplification.
• Several posts differentiate phonetic vs. phonemic writing and argue that fully phonetic transcription (e.g., raw IPA) would be impractical for everyday writing.

Origins of Alphabets and Scripts

• A long subthread debates whether nearly all alphabets derive from Proto‑Sinaitic / Canaanite scripts.
• Counterexamples raised: Hangul, Zhuyin, Japanese kana, Phags‑pa, Brahmic scripts.
• Others respond that:
  • Syllabaries aren’t alphabets.
  • Brahmic scripts are probably derived from Aramaic (and thus Proto‑Sinaitic), though a minority of scholars argue for an indigenous origin.
• There is detailed back‑and‑forth on abjad vs true alphabet, and on how well Hebrew or Arabic map sounds to letters, with no consensus.

Efficiency and Redundancy in Languages

• Someone wonders about the “most compact and efficient” language.
• Replies bring in Shannon’s notion of redundancy and relate it to crossword puzzles and literary examples, and mention hyper-compact conlang Ithkuil.
• Others note that “efficiency” depends on alphabet size, phoneme inventory, morphology, and shared vocabulary.

Article Framing and Missing Glyphs

• Several criticize the Smithsonian piece for omitting actual Cherokee glyph examples and for a slightly sensational original title.
• HN’s title is updated to better match the article; posters praise Wikipedia and Omniglot for providing the concrete tables, samples, and broader script context.