Re: boustrophedon in Re: yet another romance conlang
|From:||Patrick Dunn <tb0pwd1@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, January 6, 2000, 5:30|
On Wed, 5 Jan 2000, John Cowan wrote:
> > And anyway, i said it's "commonly" written that way.....with the highly
> > fractured conculture i'm trying to develop, there'd be some factions
> > (unassimilated colonists, hellenists) who would write only in the latin
> > script, and others (cultural zealots, religious officials) who would
> > write only in the hebrew script (if people descended idealogically from
> > zealots would speak in a romance language at all).
I could see this developing as a gesture toward political correctness. If
faction A used Hebrew and faction B used Latin albphabets, it seems
reasonable that faction C, not wanting to piss of either faction A or
faction B, might begin to alternate.
Before you think this is a dumb idea, John, consider the current
linguistic climate in American academia. Attempts to use our language
more inclusively has led to such structures as:
everyone. . . they
This is a smaller change but I could see a culture *more* divided
developing even *greater* attempts to unify. Hmm.