No and stating they are Semitic means nothing so are the languages spoken in Ethiopia. Secondly no nothing predates that found in Yeha they agree it is contemporaneous, again merely stating something is found in Marib won’t do it needs to proof it was used as a model and they have found nothing that predates that structure
Curtis
"All available evidence suggests endogenous origins for the Ona and Kidane Mehret pre-Aksumite communities and a continuity of occupation, material culture, and subsistence for at least five hundred years. These permanent urban-like agropastoral communities appeared contemporaneously to the rise of the complex South Arabian polity of Saba. There is no evidence that a Sabean tradition of urbanism or technological traditions diffused to the northern Horn in the 9th century BCE simultaneous to their own development. The Pre-Aksumite settlements and contemporaneous Sabean settlements are best viewed as co-evolving."
"Roger Schneider
This thesis was further spelt out, in the following year, by the epigraphist Roger Schneider. Emphasising the entirely unproven character of Conti Rossini’s suppositions, he pointed out for example that the people of northern Ethiopia, living as they did in a rocky environment, did not have to wait for the arrival of the Sabaeans to erect houses built of stone. He argued further that Sabaeans who came to Ethiopia “did not arrive in a cultural vacuum”, but that, on the contrary, a significant Ethiopian state, people, and language had existed well before their advent. He contended further that Sabaean settlement was restricted to a few localities, and did not impinge greatly on Northern Ethiopia as a whole.
Schneider’s final conclusion was that similarities between South Arabian and Ethiopian civilization had in fact existed long before the coming to Ethiopia of the Sabaeans. so no there is absolutely no reason to calling them south Arabian other than to dislocate the history. There is no such thing as a Sabean script in the first place.