Re: THEORY Ideal system of writing

Gary Shannon wrote:
>
> The idea I wanted to play with was a collection of
> symbols that DOES NOT REPRESENT SOUNDS.  As soon as
> people start talking about more than an alphabet they
> get locked into the sylabry mode of thinking because
> they can't seem to shake off the notion that a symbol
> MUST represent a sound.  Not so.
>
> My idea was for each symbol to represent some basic
> notion, utterly independant of the sound one makes in
> any particular language for that notion.  By stringing
> elemental notions together more speicific words are
> formed, but the symbols contain no hint at the
> pronounciation, thus the same written language might
> be pronounced in a variety of different ways.

This reminds me of the conlang aUI by John Weilgart.
This language has 31 basic symbols which are combined
to form more words. Although each symbol has a sound
assigned to it so the language can be spoken, the words
are formed from the symbols. Symbols and examples here:

http://home.pacifier.com/~patten/

Another view here:

http://www.anomalist.com/reports/language.html

--Ph. D.

Reply