The Meroitic sign d and its cursive equivalent d have been the subject of a number of investigations into its origins but particularly into attributing a sound value. In trying to deduce a correlative sound value to this sign, Griffith used comparative forms from Greek and Egyptian, although these forms gave contradictory indications. This led to an unstable proposal that the Meroitic sign d d represents a retroflex consonant, although this proposal and subsequent affirmations of its retroflex nature did not consider empirical and typological phonological evidence for this association.
This paper revisits the comparative forms used in proposing the retroflex nature of the sign d d and uses a phonological approach in proposing a revision of its sound value
