I'm actually not 100% about the earlier chart, anyway, at least in terms of classification. Certainly the 'Middle' Semitic column on that chart is not actually Hebrew, but Phoenician, and is from where the later Semitic languages descend (as well as Greek, some proto Indo European languages as well, at least in terms of script). You could just as easily talk about it as ‘ middle Punic’ or ‘Middle Akkadian’ or ‘ middle Amorite’.
The proto-sinaitic script actually more probably descends from Egyptian hieroglyphs and hieratics (the name is because the only samples we have of the first column in the original table come from the Sinai), and was probably the first attempt to transition from ideograms (picture of cat=cat) to a proper phoentic scripting system (The word phonetics comes from the Phenician, I think). I assume the third column under Ancient Semitic/Hebrew is probably actually the Canannite script, or perhaps Aramaic script. I haven’t checked.
Anyway, the main point is that the scripts after hieroglyphs were intended to move towards phonics rather than logograms, precisely because there is only so much you can say about life if most of your symbols are actually denoting objects and specific things like doors or water. Most of what survives, even into a relatively early language like Classical Hebrew or Punic, are the general shapes (though not all) and the basic phonics (though not all). You can even see this in the provided chart - some symbols change completely, some phonics change completely. In any case, it's also worth noting that quite a lot of the phonics and general shape of characters actually pass on into the Greek, for instance (and even in large chunks into our alphabet) but no one’s suggesting God spoke Greek at the beginning of time.
The logogrammatic meanings are more likely to be evident if you look at hieroglpyhs, or even something like the Ugaritic or early Akkadian cuniform.
The proto-sinaitic script actually more probably descends from Egyptian hieroglyphs and hieratics (the name is because the only samples we have of the first column in the original table come from the Sinai), and was probably the first attempt to transition from ideograms (picture of cat=cat) to a proper phoentic scripting system (The word phonetics comes from the Phenician, I think). I assume the third column under Ancient Semitic/Hebrew is probably actually the Canannite script, or perhaps Aramaic script. I haven’t checked.
Anyway, the main point is that the scripts after hieroglyphs were intended to move towards phonics rather than logograms, precisely because there is only so much you can say about life if most of your symbols are actually denoting objects and specific things like doors or water. Most of what survives, even into a relatively early language like Classical Hebrew or Punic, are the general shapes (though not all) and the basic phonics (though not all). You can even see this in the provided chart - some symbols change completely, some phonics change completely. In any case, it's also worth noting that quite a lot of the phonics and general shape of characters actually pass on into the Greek, for instance (and even in large chunks into our alphabet) but no one’s suggesting God spoke Greek at the beginning of time.
The logogrammatic meanings are more likely to be evident if you look at hieroglpyhs, or even something like the Ugaritic or early Akkadian cuniform.
