Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Non-linear / full-2d writing systems?

From:J. 'Mach' Wust <j_mach_wust@...>
Date:Thursday, May 5, 2005, 16:11
On Thu, 5 May 2005 15:53:54 +0100, Joe <joe@...> wrote:

>J. 'Mach' Wust wrote: > >>On Thu, 5 May 2005 02:15:27 -0700, Sai Emrys <saizai@...> wrote: >> >> >> >>>>Human languages are essentially linear (they are sequences of "words").
>>>>writing sytems for human languages are essentially linear as well. >>>> >>>> >>>Your argument is circular here, if you intend it as one of 'purpose'. >>>Certainly, I would agree that a writing system *intended* to 'fix >>>language' as you call it - and I presume that you make the common >>>equation that "real language" = "speech" - would need to be linear. >>>That's obvious. >>> >>>But I would strongly disagree that a writing system *need* do so at >>>all, and cannot exist entirely separate of a spoken language. >>> >>> >> >>You can do that, but it's rather unusual. Most would consider e.g. maths or >>formal logics a notational system, but not a writing system. Writing systems >>are usually considered the subgroup of notational systems that represent >>languages. >> >> > >You're rather limiting the use of 'language', there. I'd suggest that >language can be independent of speech - it's anything that can >theoretically convey any meaning, given appropriate vocabulary.
"Human language", then?


Joe <joe@...>