Re: Optimum number of symbols

En réponse à Kendra <kendra@...>:

> I'm new to the list, btw-- I've been lurking for about a week on the
> yahoo!
> groups, felt like an idiot, subscribed here, and will now subject you
> all to
> my amateurity (I have no idea whether or not that's a word, likewise.)
> I
> hope I'm not breaking any sort of secret rules that I didn't see by
> posting
> or something, but this is really interesting, even though I know
> nothing.
> Hi! :)
>
Welcome! And there are no secret rules in this group, apart from the common
respect rule :)) . Everybody is welcome to participate, whatever their
knowledge. After all, we all have to learn from others :)) .

> Also, Is there any evidence that syllabic writing systems might be
> more
> intuitive to create?
Apart from the fact that you find syllabic features in nearly all scripts of
the world, except maybe the purest alphabetic or ideographic ones? :)))

> I would agree that syllabic systems are easier to learn (i've retained
> a
> remarkable amount of Hiragana and Katakana and can read it somewhat,
> despite
> having never actually used it,) though cumbersome when 'importing'
> words...
No more than alphabetic scripts. Just look at how Spanish imports words!! (or
how French does, keeping the spelling but pronouncing it with French phonemes,
thus cutting nearly completely the link between the written word and the spoken
one).

Christophe.

http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr

Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.

Reply