> That's not the aim of writing narrowly considered, but of graphics
> in general (as my art teacher was fond of saying). We do have methods
> of conveying specific meaning outside of speech; they're called icons,
> the use of many of which are just as standardized as ordinary grammar.
Then would you consider writing that only incidentally conveys speech
- like Chinese - to be "real" writing? It's not phonetic; it cannot be
said to be "writing down" speech any better than speech could be said
to be "speaking out" the writing.
- Sai