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, 23:13
On Thu, 5 May 2005 13:25:37 -0700, Sai Emrys <saizai@...> wrote:

>> 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. > >Why yes, yes it is unusual. Especially if it is to be used that is >something that is *not* merely a notational system that is suited only >to an extremely limited domain. > >But we're in the business of *creative* linguistics, are we not? > >I for one am not interested in constraining what language can do
Neither am I (see very below)!
>merely because it hasn't been done before in a natural language. If >you can argue that there is something to the *idea* that is >impractical, impossible, or unsuited to human cognition, that would be >an interesting argument. But your argument is essentially that it is >not a code as [nearly] all other writing systems are... and that's a >chiken-and-egg.
It's a question of how the terms are defined. With my linguistical background, I'm used to think of language as primary communication system of humans that can be observed either as speech (spoken language) or as writing (written language).
>FWIW, I agree with Joe. I am using 'language' to mean 'systematic >communication system used between humans, having certain minimum >capabilities'. I am explicitly *not* using it to mean 'systematic >*speech* communication system used between humans and offshoots >thereof'.
Your point sounds as if there were communication systems that are much more powerful than speech (or language, as I'm used to call it with my linguistical background). However, of all the other ways of communicating information that I can think of, speech is the less constrained: Mathematical codes, musical codes, pictures can only represent certain kinds of information. No doubt that they are better suited than speech to encode their specific kinds information, but they can all be described with speech which is impossible vice versa, and there are many informations that can only be encoded in speech, e.g. emotions or politics. kry@s: j. 'mach' wust


Tim May <butsuri@...>
Sai Emrys <saizai@...>
B. Garcia <madyaas@...>