Topic: Pre-Classical Sebastic, Orthography, Cuneiform
Pre-Classical SebasticPre-Classical Sebastic refers to Sebastic writings that predate the Sebastic literary period. The language
appears to be characterized by the following features.
Phonology-Lack of vowel reduction
-Absence of /dʒ/
-Presence of /z/ ([dz]?)
-Existence of an undefined sibilant transcribed as s₄
-Apparent coexistence of phonemic /tʃ/ and /ts/
Morphology-Lack of NC stems. ND stem either unclear or non-existent.
Orthography-Orthography occasionally distinguishes historical emphatics, indicating movement towards dissimilation
-Some, but very limited confusion of vowels, indicating lack of phonemic /ə/ but probable vowel reduction for /u/ (centralized unrounded allophone of /u/) in propretonic positions.
-Written in Phoenician abjad, cuneiform, and Egyptian hieroglyphs.
CuneiformFun fact: Apparently the zBB cannot handle cuneiform unicodeThe earliest writings of Sebastic in Canaan are written in cuneiform. Like Phoenician but unlike Egyptian hieroglyphs, cuneiform continued to be employed into the early Classical period.
The reason for writing Sebastic in cuneiform is still uncertain, and was an anomalous phenomenon. International correspondence was conducted in Akkadian, and letters between Sebastians were typically recorded in the Phoenician script. The types of documents written in Sebastic cuneiform are primarily administrative records, court documents (including contracts supervised by a court), private scribal notes, and magic inscriptions. Commonalities between these documents seem to be frequent, everyday business associated with municipal governance or oversight. They are further characterized by the lack of wide accessibility to cuneiform, giving select individuals the ability to read or forge documents.
The prevailing theory is that Sebastic cuneiform is a product of local centralization of government, but in a more economic and less expensive manner than Akkadian cuneiform. According to this theory, far more scribes were available to write in cuneiform than there were scribes who knew Akkadian. After mastering the cuneiform and having experience as a scribe, some scribes would have the opportunity to learn Akkadian. During the learning stage, they would gradually replace Sebastic with Akkadian. This is attested by the existence of private scribal notes and magic inscriptions in Sebastic cuneiform with varying levels of Akkadian interference, while there is a near total lack of mixture in administrative records or court documents. Scribes who knew Akkadian would then be employed only for documents with international implications.
SyllabaryBy the Classical period, the cuneiform syllabary appears to have simplified for writing Sebastic. With few exceptions, syllabograms were biphonemic, representing either CV or VC syllables. Syllabograms for
hV could be used to represent vowels independently. In cases of CVC syllables, two syllabograms would be used to represent the syllable: eg,
sa-ak for
sak. While vowel length was not evident in this system, it did distinguish gemination:
sa-ki-im for sákim, but
sa-ak-ki-im for
sákkim.

StressSince stress was phonemic in Classical Sebastic, later cuneiform texts would often distinguish ambiguous cases by adding a vocalic syllable into the word:
ja-sa-a-ak-ki-im for
jasákkim and
ja-a-sa-ak-ki-im for
jásakkim.
LogogramsMany Akkadian (=Sumerian) logograms were preserved.
DeterminativesOnly a handful of Akkadian determinatives existed. Personal names and city names tended to use determinatives. In an odd in-between, names of countries spelled out the Akkadian word
ma-a-at, and treated it as a determinative.
Morphosyntactic markersAn interesting feature of Sebastic cuneiform is its employment of Akkadian morphosyntactic markers, including for features not present in Sebastic. Likewise, Sebastic cuneiform was written in SOV word order, while Sebastic naturally tended towards VSO or Subject-Predicate word orders.
Plural nouns were not written as broken plurals. Instead, the singular noun was used, followed by a plural marker. A collective marker was used also for collectives.
Even though Sebastic never had cases, case tended to be marked, and was included in the feminine marking of feminine nouns. For masculine nouns, case was marked with the final syllabogram, which would end with -u (nominative), -a (accusative), -i (genitive). Case would often be marked wrong. In plural nouns, case would be marked prior to the plural marking.

Verb conjugations tended to be written morphographically.
Example
ŠUM A.BA DUMU.MUNUS PI-ad PI.AŠ-ra-ŠU I-at-ma-si-ma I.mu-ut A DUMU.MUNUS IGI.6.GÁL ŠA É-ŠU I-la-a-ak-ki-ḪI-I
jim ábam bich yad wáchraju yátmasī-ma, yamū́t, ha bich sudsa ja báytaju yəlákkiḥī
If the father has forgotten a daughter in his inheritance and dies, that daughter shall take a sixth of his house
Gloss of cuneiform:
ŠUM A.BA DUMU.MUNUS PI-ad PI.AŠ-ra-ŠUIF FATHER [SON.FEM] (wV/yV)-ad (wv/yV).ach-ra-3MS.POSS.PRO
I-at-ma-si-ma I.mu-ut3-at-ma-si-ma 3-mu-ut
A DUMU.MUNUS IGI.6.GÁL ŠA É-ŠU I-la-a-ak-ki-ḪI-Iha [SON.FEM] [PARTIAL.6.MEASURE] POSS HOUSE-3MS.POSS.PRO 3-la-a-ak-ki-ḤI-FEM