languages we are likely to encounter in our examination, which means that the quanta we
decide upon should be capable of defining individual units within texts that are composed
in alphabetical, syllabic or logographic scripts. The unit of calculation that we employ in
the following study should thus be capable of quantifying texts written in any of these
scripts, without bias towards one system of writing or another. In defining such a versa-
tile unit of quantification we will ultimately produce a more detailed and finely tuned
analysis.
The studies reviewed above typically use a ‘word’ as their main unit of calculation. A
word is generally counted as a group of letters or signs situated between word dividers,
which are commonly represented by dots or spaces. It should be pointed out, though, that
the tendency in Semitic languages is to package multiple semogenic units into singular
groups of letters, without separating these letter-groups with word dividers.^97 Thus, a
typical Hebrew form like Kyswsl may be counted in any one of the reviewed models as
one word, given that it is a single series of uninterrupted letters, separated from other let-
ter-groups by word dividers at either end of the series. However, if we consider the se-
mogenic parts of this letter-group, we find that multiple morphemes are collated to con-
struct semogenic units that each have an identifiable meaning. In the form Kyswsl an ini-
tial preposition indicates a beneficiary, and this is followed by a plural noun, “horses.”
The final element in the series is a second person masculine possessive pronominal suf-
fix. The whole package constitutes three definable semogenic units that are collated into
one series of uninterrupted letters.
(^97) M.A.K. Halliday, An Introduction to Functional Grammar (^) (London: Arnold, 2004 (^3) ) 9, describes the term
‘semogenic’ as relating to the smallest textual unit that creates meaning.