Re: Tree writing [Was: Non-linear / full-2d writing systems?]

On 5/6/05, Patrick Littell <puchitao@...> wrote:
> Two barriers to more general participation remain: first, the language ought
> to be basically analytic on some level of analysis. (Or the participants
> must inflect things in a very similar manner. Or their speakers have to be
> awfully clever.) Secondly, the same or similar categories of information
> ought to be represented in each language. If my language has singular, dual,
> paucal, and plural but no gender, and your language has gender but no
> number, and his language makes an alienable-inalienable distinction in
> possessives and grammaticalizes respect... well, then we each oughta go find
> other co-participants.
Surely the language could have its own separate grammar, independent of
any other language, as several people here have (basically) suggested.
The various parts of speech (which were chosen for the writing system)
could be indicated by mutation of symbols, affixing more symbols,
position (could get tricky), or not at all.

Reply