Re: Scripts

CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU writes:
> Finally, keep writing the same shapes over and over again. Letters get
>"worn
>down"; for example, just look at the evolution of the Phonecian script.
>Excessively complex shapes will get simplified; shapes that are too
>similar
>will be made dissimilar. If it takes you less than a month to invent a
>script, you have not even started. If it takes you a year, then you are
>well
>on your way. But if it takes you five years (like *cough* your humble
>narrator), get off your rocker and delcare it "good enough" already! :)
Kuraw (the Saalangal script) arrived at its present form through lots of
writing and rewriting of letter shapes. The formal is a bit different from
the handwritten form by a little, but not too much, since Kuraw was always
written by hand, although carefully. The best example of this is ga vs.
ya. which look similar, but ga has a middle descender with goes to the
line (like m with a loop on the far right leg). Ya has two humps, but no
middle descender. So, in fast handwriting both would look too similar. My
solution? make ya a simple arch with a small loop at the end.

Another thing, if you have diacritics that are complex, these will get
simplified. Kuraw has a few like this, which are turned into simpler
strokes when written fast.



As for scripts I find most beautiful, i find that Hiragana, Arabic, Hebrew
(especially Rashi style), Aramaic, Most Indic Scripts (except Oriya),
Javanese, Chinese, and Tibetan to be prettiest. It's mostly scripts that
have a fair mix of straight lines, angles, and curves that do it for me.
Which is why i dislike Runes, and Ogham, far too angular. Although i
prefer a script that's all curves to one that's all lines and angles.



__________________________
Communication is not just words, communication is...architecture
because of course it is quite obvious that  the house that would be built
without that desire, that desire to communicate, would not look as your
house does today.