Re: CHAT: Fonts (Re: CHAT: Constructed maps)
|From:||Ollock Ackeop <ollock@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, June 27, 2007, 6:50|
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:21:58 -0700, David J. Peterson <dedalvs@...> wrote:
Hmm. That's very interesting. I'm sorry the post screwed up. It seems I
didn't realize LISTSERV would reject HTML (if that is what it rejected).
I haven't thought much of the proto-forms and such, as I usually don't
develop my conlangs diachronically, instead choosing to throw in hints of
sound changes here and there and going back only when I need to. Your post
does interest me in reconsidering my orthographic conventions.
In any case, if you saw my symbols, you might have noticed that the symbols
are scrunched into blocks á la Hangul. Will I have to make separate
characters for all those variants, or could I possibly make alternate glyphs
such that when I put on a coda, everything else gets scrunched into the top
of the box?
>Ollock, something very bizarre happened to your message
>when it was sent, so I'm not sure if all of it got through. Here's
>what came through on my end:
><<<< Do you have ways to create fonts that can make character into
>two or three different glyph types and arrange them into syllable
>blocks? >>> I don't quite understand what you mean. If you use a
>Windows computer, there's considerably less freedom in how many
>glyphs you have, and where you can put them on the keyboard.>> I'll
>give you a description i did for zompist forum to illustrate: Yeltax
>has a really strange syllabic system called Kedeke (from an archaic
>term for "scratch"). Each character stands for a single V or CV
>syllable, which would be enough if Yeltax if it were like Japanese,
>but it isn't. Yeltax syllable structure is roughly (C)(C)V(C), so to
>write "complex" syllables, various characters are clustered into
>blocks. To get an idea of how this works, I'll give a couple of word
>examples. Gogo /gogo/ (= egg) is two simple syllables: "go" + "go" .
>tya'ke. For example,in do'Kajex /do?kadZex/ (= "the Mind" -- the god
>of the Xala):
>I found your thread on the ZBB, though, so I see what you mean.
>The first question I would have is, how did the language evolve
>codas and complex consonant clusters? If the current system
>evolved from a previously (C)V system, then it would make
>sense to have only (C)V characters. It would also tell you how
>each character was spelled already. So, for example, you have
>a word for crystal:
>sgE (with some tones)
>If the older proto form were...
>...then the word would be spelled "si" + "gE" (or "ke", or whatever
>the original syllable was). The vowel from "si" wouldn't be there
>anymore, but one would expect the spelling system to be conservative.
>Now, if over the years these vowels became redundant, you
>might expect that something would happen to those characters.
>So, if you had a rule that, for example, deleted all /i/'s in between
>two consonants, then the "Ci" characters could be thought of as
>consonant characters, and you might write them above the
>writing line, or below, or smaller, like the little characters that
>tell you the consonant is palatalized in Japanese (or a geminate).
>Depending on how many of these types of consonants you had,
>it'd be a relatively simple matter to do the font. You'd have your
>ordinary syllabary, and then a list of special characters that were
>small, or whatever. And, yes, it's relatively simple to create a
>character that, if typed, appears over or under (or even to the
>left of) the previous character. This is what I did for the Proto-Drem
>I've also created a syllabary for a language with consonant
>clusters, though it's not a font. Essentially, what I did was I
>created a glyph for every (C)(C)V possible. In Gweydr (the
>language it's for), a word may begin maximally with CrV, ClV,
>CjV or CwV. Thus, for each consonant, I created five different
>sets of glyphs--e.g., for m, mrV, mlV, mjV, mwV and mV.
>In addition to this, a word may also begin with an /s/, making
>the max onset sC(r/l/w/j)V. All I had to do was create a
>modified /s/ glyph that could be attached to the front. After
>that, the codas were a simple matter. I simply created a smaller
>version of the basic shape of the ordinary onset glyphs for
>each consonant, and they're stacked at the end.
>Here's what that system looks like: