From: Alex Ferguson (abf@interzone.ucc.ie)
Date: Wed 09 Jul 1997 - 17:08:44 EEST
David Weihe wonders:
> Is it certain that Pelandan is ideogrammatic?
Well, given the the existance in the Entekosiad of "Appendix. Pelandan
Ideograms"...
> It seemed to me, when I
> read the Entekosiad, that it would be well represented by a syllabary
Certainly it's not precisely a syllabary, at least in the strict way
that Katakana/Hiragana is; from the text of E., many of the glyphs are
at least bisyllabic ([Ul]Eria, etc.); but what isn't so clear is just
how ideogrammatic (vs. pseudo-syllabic, or whatever) in "character" the
script actually is. That is, did the glyphs all originate as "pictures",
and were they always used to denote that original meaning, or sometimes
simply for their sound? After the JeSeven business, of course, this
becomes all the more muddled, as people "spell out" names in Pelandan
glyphs, in a way which may well not correspond to their original
meanings.
Good luck,
AlEx.
------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 18:59:47 EEST