Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: An Alphagraphic Language

From:Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...>
Date:Wednesday, March 31, 2004, 0:01
--- Nokta Kanto <red5_2@...> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 21:33:24 -0800, Gary Shannon > <fiziwig@...> wrote: >
...
> The letters that make > up a word are neither phonetic nor ideographic. > They are abstract > squiggles that fit together to form longer abstract > squiggles. These > abstract squiggles are assigned arbitrarily to > words, ... > > I would imagine such a language would have more use > for spaces; there might > be condensed spacing in which letters overlap, and > many words with single > spaces in the middle of them.
That's true. I hadn't thought that far ahead about it yet, but you make a good point.
> > Some words arguably benefit from similar appearance. > How would you handle > conjugated words? Would "write" look anything like > "written"? How about > words with similar etymologies? Would "illuminate" > look anything like > "luminous"?
I thought perhaps inflections would be handled by various swishes, swashes and do-dads attached to or appended to the word. "written" might be "write" with a certain curly flourish following the word, while "writing" could be the same symbol again, but with a different inflecting decoration attached to it. There might be some simple decoration to indicate plural so 'children' might be written 'child~*' (not the actual Roman alphabet words, of course, but the symbolic version with some decoration attached to the right end of it) I figured on having between 25 and 30 actual symbols in the font plus an additional 10 or 15 (or more) inflectional decorations and add-ons for a total of 35 to 45 characters in the font. Using upper and lower case alpha key assignments I can easily accomodate 52 font symbols total, so that number of symbols is not a problem for a standard font. I can see how related words might have related symbols, especially if those symbols were at all pictographic. if <@> is "eye" then maybe <@)< would be "look" or "see". But the original intent was for the symbols NOT to be pictographic at all, so I'll have to see how that works out as I get deeper into the design of the font. If I'm not mistaken (I haven't really dug into true type fonts yet) font characters can be designed to overlap with each other, or to occupy quadrants of a grid. Maybe the the symbols could be constructed on a grid like Korean Hangul characters, which I have always admired for their logic and beauty. --gary
> --Noktakanto

Reply

Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@...>