From: Alex Ferguson (abf@interzone.ucc.ie)
Date: Thu 10 Jul 1997 - 15:09:10 EEST
David Dunham says of Trotsky's ((justifiedly) selective) quoting of
Pendragon's definition of Worldly:
> This is no doubt why I considered this trait as an Issaries virtue.
Perhaps, but if so it doesn't make much sense to continue to interpret
its opposite as meaning "superstitious"/"spiritual", as you elsewhere
implied.
[Peter M.]
> > And would a Pelorian spell out the full name of Yelm every time
> > or would he denote it with a Sun Rune? Runes are used for writing,
> Sure, but they're not part of a writing system, any more than when I write
> a triangle to mean "delta" as in "change" or a Mars glyph to mean "male."
> Triangle and Mars aren't letters. (They might be considered ideographs.)
Well, the last time I checked, the "triangle" was the Greek capital
letter delta. It's part of several different writing systems, though
using it in a context which the reader wasn't Greek, a mathematician, or
a serious LaTeX head might be unconducive to understanding. (ASCII
isn't a big help either, and I don't think some of the technology out
there in net-land would be entirely happy with .dvi files.)
Not dissimilarly, it seems conceivable to me that in parts of Peloria,
either before the Dara Happan alphabet become dominant, or more
recently, after glyphs became hip again, that some writing mixes
Pelandan ideograms together with Dara Happan letters. Compare with say
BSL (I think ASL, too), or lots of Tokyo street signs, etc. (Apparently
seeing four different sets of characters on a Japanese cereal box is
pretty routine.)
> Dara Happan does seem to be an alphabet derived from runes, so I don't want
> Pelandan to be the same.
Pelandan does indeed not have an "alphabet", it has an ideographology,
if you'll forgive the term, so they're pretty dashed different right
away. But I'm not at all sure what to make of the demand that it not be
"derived from runes". In what way is Dara Happan "runic" that Pelandan
Must Not be? Do you mean in terms of resemblance to the Canonical
rune-set, or the abstact notion of runes?
In 7 bits,
Alex.
------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 19:07:17 EEST