Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Alphabets with logographic symbols

Expand Messages
  • Arthaey Angosii
    As I m working on adding more glyphs to my font* for the Asha ille alphabet, I m finding that I want to add special glyphs for some common prefixes, suffixes,
    Message 1 of 11 , Jan 30, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      As I'm working on adding more glyphs to my font* for the Asha'ille
      alphabet, I'm finding that I want to add special glyphs for some
      common prefixes, suffixes, and circumflexes, and even some words.
      English has "&" instead of "and" sometimes, but otherwise English is
      pretty strictly alphabetical. Are there ANADEWs for alphabetic writing
      systems with a sprinkling of logographs thrown in?


      --
      AA


      * Shameless plug: http://www.arthaey.com/conlang/writing/fonts.html
    • Arthaey Angosii
      ... Not counting Japanese -- having most content words be kanji is way more than a sprinkling in my opinion! :) -- AA
      Message 2 of 11 , Jan 30, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        I wrote:
        > Are there ANADEWs for alphabetic writing
        > systems with a sprinkling of logographs thrown in?

        Not counting Japanese -- having most content words be kanji is way
        more than a "sprinkling" in my opinion! :)


        --
        AA
      • Eugene Oh
        Sumerian/Akkadian shared that sort of relationship, if I m not wrong. Akkadian borrowed the Sumerian phonetic writing system and adopted the Sumerian spellings
        Message 3 of 11 , Jan 30, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Sumerian/Akkadian shared that sort of relationship, if I'm not wrong.
          Akkadian borrowed the Sumerian phonetic writing system and adopted the
          Sumerian spellings of some common words as logograms pronounced in the
          Akkadian way, as though we pronounced "soleil" [sVn].
          At least that's IIRC.

          Eugene

          2009/1/30 Arthaey Angosii <arthaey@...>

          > I wrote:
          > > Are there ANADEWs for alphabetic writing
          > > systems with a sprinkling of logographs thrown in?
          >
          > Not counting Japanese -- having most content words be kanji is way
          > more than a "sprinkling" in my opinion! :)
          >
          >
          > --
          > AA
          >
        • Chris Wright
          ... Stenography, perhaps? Court writing? I imagine that only very common words would keep their logographs.
          Message 4 of 11 , Jan 30, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            2009/1/30 Arthaey Angosii <arthaey@...>:
            > As I'm working on adding more glyphs to my font* for the Asha'ille
            > alphabet, I'm finding that I want to add special glyphs for some
            > common prefixes, suffixes, and circumflexes, and even some words.
            > English has "&" instead of "and" sometimes, but otherwise English is
            > pretty strictly alphabetical. Are there ANADEWs for alphabetic writing
            > systems with a sprinkling of logographs thrown in?

            Stenography, perhaps? Court writing?

            I imagine that only very common words would keep their logographs.
          • Arthaey Angosii
            ... Excellent! That s more or less the level of logograph sprinkling I had in mind. Thanks. :) Omniglot s page on Shorthand has some useful info. ...
            Message 5 of 11 , Jan 30, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Chris Wright <dhasenan@...> wrote:
              > Stenography, perhaps? Court writing?

              Excellent! That's more or less the level of "logograph sprinkling" I
              had in mind. Thanks. :) Omniglot's page on "Shorthand" has some useful
              info.

              > I imagine that only very common words would keep their logographs.

              Indeed. I'm planning on having "special" forms for the verb suffixes
              marking first and second person*, some other common productive
              affixes, and very common words like "and" and "the".

              I'll look into the various shorthands' lists of abbreviations for
              common words, to see what other systems have found useful to
              abbreviate. Thanks again for pointing me in a useful direction.


              --
              AA


              * I lie, Asha'ille doesn't do your traditional 1st/2nd/3rd person
              distinctions. But those details don't matter for this post. :)
            • David J. Peterson
              ... This is what I did for the orthography of Tan Tyls: http://dedalvs.conlang.org/tantyls/orthography.html There are, essentially, a series of special glyphs
              Message 6 of 11 , Jan 30, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                On Jan 30, 2009, at 11∞05 AM, Arthaey Angosii wrote:

                > As I'm working on adding more glyphs to my font* for the Asha'ille
                > alphabet, I'm finding that I want to add special glyphs for some
                > common prefixes, suffixes, and circumflexes, and even some words.

                This is what I did for the orthography of Tan Tyls:

                http://dedalvs.conlang.org/tantyls/orthography.html

                There are, essentially, a series of special glyphs for common affixes.
                Many are slightly modified versions of the glyphs for the sounds
                present in the affix.

                This is also the case with the Stone Script I came up with for Gweydr:

                http://dedalvs.conlang.org/gweydr/stone/body.html

                As for a natural language with glyphs just for affixes, no, no natural
                language does that. There is no natural language orthography that
                is sensitive to morphemes (perhaps further evidence that they don't
                exist). If a language has glyphs for particular affixes, it will be
                a part
                of a larger system that features glyphs of the same type for words,
                as well as elements larger than and smaller than words.

                > English has "&" instead of "and" sometimes, but otherwise English is
                > pretty strictly alphabetical.

                That depends how standard you want to get. Consider 1337 speak
                and emoticons in IMs and e-mails. They come close. Some others:

                #, @, $, %, ¢

                I've always found $ in particular fascinating, since it doesn't conform
                to the linear order of English (i.e. $500 is read "five hundred
                dollars").
                I've seen this cause confusion in others *and* myself while writing,
                often producing things like, "That'll cost 500$!"--especially when you
                have to produce orthographic equivalents of things like "I've only got
                twenty or thirty dollars on me."

                > Are there ANADEWs for alphabetic writing
                > systems with a sprinkling of logographs thrown in?

                I almost want to say that Arabic's word for Allah is a logograph,
                since its pronunciation is pretty far from its spelling, and it looks
                very different from all other words, and often acts independently
                (many Arabic fonts have a character just for the word "Allah").

                OH!!! You know what did it? I totally forgot about it--my
                favorite natural language orthography: Mayan epigraphs. The
                Mayan Epigraphic Database Project is one of the greatest things
                in the history of the world. First, go here to see how the database
                works:

                http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/med/glyph_catalog.html

                To see the actual glyphs, go here:

                http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/med/docs/img_catalog

                That page has frames; this one doesn't, in case you don't like them:

                http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/med/docs/_catalog.html

                Unfortunately, there's not an easy way to see what they all mean...
                Glyphs are categorized by their use, not necessarily by their
                meaning or sound. Nevertheless, the look of it at least makes
                a distinction between base glyphs and secondary glyphs.

                -David
                *******************************************************************
                "sunly eleSkarez ygralleryf ydZZixelje je ox2mejze."
                "No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."

                -Jim Morrison

                http://dedalvs.conlang.org/
              • Philip Newton
                ... Perhaps not quite logographs, but old Latin and Greek manuscripts had a sometimes quite elaborate system of traditional abbreviations for common words and
                Message 7 of 11 , Jan 31, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  2009/1/30 Arthaey Angosii <arthaey@...>:
                  > Are there ANADEWs for alphabetic writing
                  > systems with a sprinkling of logographs thrown in?

                  Perhaps not quite logographs, but old Latin and Greek manuscripts had
                  a sometimes quite elaborate system of traditional abbreviations for
                  common words and morphemes which might fit the bill.

                  Cheers,
                  --
                  Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>
                • Benct Philip Jonsson
                  ... Most stenography systems use very few actual logograms or morphograms, but all use heavy abbreviations and abbreviate the most common morphemes and words
                  Message 8 of 11 , Jan 31, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On 2009-01-30 Arthaey Angosii wrote:
                    > > Stenography, perhaps? Court writing?
                    >
                    > Excellent! Thats more or less the level of "logograph
                    > sprinkling" I
                    > had in mind. Thanks. :) Omniglots page on "Shorthand"
                    > has some useful
                    > info.
                    >
                    >

                    Most stenography systems use very few actual
                    logograms or morphograms, but all use heavy
                    abbreviations and abbreviate the most common
                    morphemes and words to single letters or
                    modified letters. I guess modified letters
                    that stand for morphemes or words may be called
                    logograms, but most modified letters are just
                    other letters or stand for phoneme clusters
                    rather than or in addition to standing for
                    words and morphemes. E.g. in the system I
                    use (Melins Swedish shorthand in my own
                    adaptatation to English:

                    * <t> = <to>
                    * enlarged <t> = <d> = <-ed>, <did>
                    * stretched <d> = <nd> = <do> = <-and> = <-end>.
                    * tilted <d> = <nd> = <dont>
                    * ticked <d> = <ds> = <didnt>
                    * ticked <do> = <nds> = <does> = <ance>
                    * ticked <dont> = <nds> = <doesnt> = <ence>
                    * enlarged <d> = <st> = <stand>
                    * tilted <st> = <nst> = <stands>
                    * stretched <st> = <nst> = <must>
                    * ticked <st> = <stant>
                    * ticked <nst> = <stance>
                    * bent <st> = <stood>
                    * stretched <t> = <nt> = <ant> = <ought> = <-out>
                    * stretched <u> = <ou> = the word <out>
                    * <b><ought> = <bout> but <b><o><t> = <bought>
                    * tilted <t> = <nt> = <not> = <n't> = <-ent>

                    One does similarly with <m> = <them>to get <sm> =
                    = <small> and <com(e)> and <comp> and with
                    <k> = <can> to get <con> and <kt> = <can't>
                    and <cont> and <const(ruct)> and <g> = <get>
                    and <go> and <gone> (but <got> = <g><o> and
                    <gotten> = <g><o><n>!) and <ng> and <long>
                    and <lang(u)> = <ling(u)>, the last a
                    special adapted to my needs.
                    As you see one depends a lot on context to
                    disambiguate. As a last resort a word or
                    morpheme can a be written out.
                    The only morpheme sign which I don't think
                    of as a modification of another sign is
                    <-ing> = <eng>. Technically it can be seen
                    as a reduced tilted <m> but that analysis is
                    not very meaningful. The meaning connection
                    between <-ing> and stretched <-ing> = <und(er)> =
                    = <ond> = <ound> isn't obvious either.

                    /BP 8^)>
                    --
                    Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch atte melroch dotte se
                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                    "C'est en vain que nos Josués littéraires crient
                    à la langue de s'arrêter; les langues ni le soleil
                    ne s'arrêtent plus. Le jour où elles se *fixent*,
                    c'est qu'elles meurent." (Victor Hugo)
                  • Henrik Theiling
                    Hi! ... Some examples can be found on me page: http://www.theiling.de/schrift/fraktur.html **Henrik
                    Message 9 of 11 , Feb 2, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi!

                      Philip Newton writes:
                      > 2009/1/30 Arthaey Angosii <arthaey@...>:
                      >> Are there ANADEWs for alphabetic writing
                      >> systems with a sprinkling of logographs thrown in?
                      >
                      > Perhaps not quite logographs, but old Latin and Greek manuscripts had
                      > a sometimes quite elaborate system of traditional abbreviations for
                      > common words and morphemes which might fit the bill.

                      Some examples can be found on me page:

                      http://www.theiling.de/schrift/fraktur.html

                      **Henrik
                    • Keith Gaughan
                      ... Dunno about ANADEW, but how s this: I d an idea for a script that was something like this. The idea was that the script was originally for a language that
                      Message 10 of 11 , Feb 2, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Arthaey Angosii wrote:

                        > As I'm working on adding more glyphs to my font* for the Asha'ille
                        > alphabet, I'm finding that I want to add special glyphs for some
                        > common prefixes, suffixes, and circumflexes, and even some words.
                        > English has "&" instead of "and" sometimes, but otherwise English is
                        > pretty strictly alphabetical. Are there ANADEWs for alphabetic writing
                        > systems with a sprinkling of logographs thrown in?

                        Dunno about ANADEW, but how's this:

                        I'd an idea for a script that was something like this. The idea was that the
                        script was originally for a language that worked in a manner not entirely
                        unlike that of a Semitic language, but later ended up being used by languages
                        not entirely unlike plain vanilla IE or Ugric languages.

                        Words in this script[1] consist of two parts: the root/radical and a
                        logographic determinative. The original language just had consonants in the
                        root, and the determinative, ahem, determined the rest of the shape of the
                        word.

                        The script was later adopted by other languages, which complicated things
                        quite nicely. Some of the consonant glyphs were repurposed to represent vowels
                        in the root (similarly to what happened the the Greeks repurposed the
                        Phoenician alphabet), added and dropped determinatives as needed, &c., but the
                        basic idea stayed the same: root + determinative.

                        K.

                        [1] And that script was derived from a simplification of an older script
                        *still*, which was purely logographic, and the symbols used for letters
                        and determinatives were derived from this script. Think Bopomofo or,
                        better yet, Kana.
                      • Brandon Green
                        Also... if you really want a script similar to this.. look to Japanese and Korean. Japanese has a syllabary but still uses larges amount of borrowed Chinese
                        Message 11 of 11 , Feb 2, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Also... if you really want a script similar to this.. look to Japanese and
                          Korean.
                          Japanese has a syllabary but still uses larges amount of borrowed Chinese
                          symbols.
                          Korean has an alphabet, but in the south they still use Chinese glyphs for
                          names and such.

                          - Brandon M. Green


                          Don't go reaching for the Mirror Flower and grabbing at the Water Moon....
                          - Chinese Proverb

                          The mane of sun pouring down
                          Erases footprints on thin ice.
                          Do not fear decption
                          The world lies atop deception
                          -Bleach by Tite Kubo

                          If it rusts, it can never be trusted
                          If its owner fails to control it, it will cut him
                          Yes, pride is
                          Like a blade
                          -Bleach by Tite Kubo

                          We think a flower on a cliff is beautiful
                          because we stop our feet at the cliff's edge,
                          unable to step out into the sky
                          like that fearless flower.
                          -Bleach by Tite Kubo
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.