|Date:||Monday, January 13, 2003, 18:08|
On Monday 13 January 2003 9:43 am, Eamon Graham wrote:
> "A. Ingram" wrote:
> > I'm thinking of making a syllabary for my conlang. Has anyone else used
> > this method for scripting? What are some of the drawbacks and
> > advantages? Somehow I feel that I will have to define all the possible
> > phonological possiblilities before I can actually begin using it. This
> > makes me think that it will be a limiting factor. I know that the
> > Cherokee Indian Nation uses one and I've even seen it. I'm probably just
> > missing something.
> Syllabaries are great but as has already been pointed out they're
> usually for very specific phonologies. Even the Cherokee system
> doesn't exactly work: final vowels are usually dropped in speech,
> and there are a couple other irregularities.
> You might split the difference and work with an idea similar to that
> of Indic scripts: make each character have an inherent vowel (/a/
> perhaps), the vowel can be changed by putting a mark over or below
> it, and another mark gets rid of the vowel completely but keeps the
> Or you can use Hangul. :) That's quite popular with East Asian
> Conlangs, as its a very efficient script.
> If you don't already know it, there's a good site about scripts that
> might give you some ideas:
I have a thing for Devanagari, and other such scripts..
They have the efficiency of a syllabary combined with the versatility of an
alphabet, and they have a great way of doing consonant clusters...