Re: Con-scripts

En réponse à D Tse <exponent@...>:

>
> Oh, on that note, don't get me started on the Japanese name ideograms...
> They often have horrible non-standard readings, and 80% of them aren't
> in
> common use, and get this, most of them have 2, 3 or more readings! :)
>
Mmmm.... Yummy!

> That's why I borrowed a similar system for naming in my conculture :P
>
Tj'a-ts'a~n is written with a similar system too :) . It uses ideograms
corresponding to single-syllable stems, and corresponding to their meaning. But
they are also used for their pronunciation to transcribe the affixes, and
homonyms are usually written with only one ideogram. And since the affixes
undergo both vowel and consonnant harmony, there is quite a fight among
different schools of writing, some pretending to do "all phonetic" and to write
the same affix with different ideograms depending on its pronunciation, others
pretending to do "all semantic" and have only one ideogram for one affix, since
the pronunciation changes are triggered by the stem. Anyway, because of the
difference between stem morphology and affix morphology, none of those
approaches is better. There are always problems of transcriptions :) .
Tj'a-ts'a~n should really be written with a system like Japanese, that's to say
phonetic symbols for the affixes and ideograms for the stems, but it never
occured to the Sky People (the speakers of Tj'a-ts'a~n) to do so. Writing is
sacred, so using something else than existing ideograms is considered heretic :)
.

Christophe.

http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr

Reply