Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

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

From:Joe <joe@...>
Date:Thursday, May 5, 2005, 17:01
J. 'Mach' Wust wrote:

>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"). >>>>> >>>>> >Ergo, > > >>>>>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? > > > >
Well, Human spoken language. I can see that a two-dimensional spoken language could be richer, but I'm not clever enough to think of a way to avoid a linear core.