Re: Non-linear full-2d writing (again)

On 1/31/06, tomhchappell <tomhchappell@...> wrote:
> --- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, Sai Emrys <sai@S...> wrote:
> >Arbitrary in my use: any node can be connected to any number of
> >other nodes. (assuming it's on the node-and-connection sort of
> >style, which it need not be if it has a fusional morphology)
........
> A graph is "planar" if it can fit on a plane without any of the
> connections crossing each other.
>
> It turns out that a graph is planar exactly if it does not contain
....

If I recall correctly, Sai was talking earlier about
representing non-planar graphs using either crossover
symbols to show some connections jumping
over another in 3-dimensional space, or distinctly
colored lines to represent such connections.

I think we've covered the limits of a polygon-tiling
system and a planar graph system pretty well.
I'm more interested in getting back to Sai's comment
about

>which it need not be if it has a fusional morphology
What did you mean by that?  That some glyphs are
fusions of more than one other glyph, having recognizable
component parts, but acting like one glyph for
the purpose of connections to other glyphs?
Or more or less regular mutations of glyphs
to indicate certain categories shown by
inflection in spoken languages -- like the thickening
of certain strokes in Heptapod B to indicate
tense or plurality (I forget which)?
And how would that get around the limitations
that Jefferson and Tom have described?
I guess if you are showing some common
modifications with inflections of your primary glyphs
instead of connecting them to modifier
glyphs, that frees up some connections
for other purposes.  E.g. if you thicken the rightmost
stroke of your verb-glyph to indicate pastness,
you don't have to connect it to another
glyph meaning "past", and it has more
possible connections (in a tiling system
or planar graph system), -- or at least
more room to have connections before
getting too cluttered to be readable,
if you allow nonplanar graphs.

(What other mutations might be regularly
applied to glyphs for inflectional purposes?
Making thin strokes thicker, making straight
strokes wavy, doubling or tripling single
strokes; rotating, flipping, stretching or
squeezing... and of course appending
some much smaller glyph.  There might
be different "declensions" of glyphs,
with some (asymmetrical) showing
plurality (for instance) by flipping
or rotating, while others (more symmetical)
show plurality by doubling the leftmost
stroke.)

--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry

Reply