Re: A conlang idea rolling around in my head

--- Ray Brown <ray.brown@...> wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 2, 2003, at 09:24 PM, Gary
> Shannon wrote:
<snip>

> > Oh, and a PS on the pictographs: I had a method
> where
> > any pictograph could be mentally converted into a
> > five-digit number literally at a glance,
>
> Did each yield a _unique_ 5 digit number?
>
> > and this
> > numerical key was the cannonical order for the
> glyph
> > dictionary.
As I recall there were between 3 and 6 glyphs for each
index number in my dictionary.  I had four boxes of
cards each with one glyph.  The boxes of cards were
the kind available at most college bookstores for
making flash cards.  Each box held 1000 cards so I had
somewher between 3,000 and 4,000 glyphs.

That implies around 800 unique index numbers for 4,000
glyphs.  In theory about 900 unique index numbers are
possible, so however large the vocabulary it would
have to be parcelled out among those 900 index
numbers.  For 20,000 glyphs, for example, one should
expect that about 20 to 25 glyphs will share the same
index number.

I'll be adding the details of the index numbering
method to my Piktok website sometime tomorrow
(Thursday).

http://fiziwig.com/piktok.html

--gary


>
> Ray
> ===============================================
> http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
> ray.brown@freeuk.com    (home)
> raymond.brown@kingston-college.ac.uk   (work)
> ===============================================