Ar 01:55 -0700 1999-10-22, scríobh Christopher John Fynn:
>Only four? Inventing languages, alphabets and grammars and then writing
>books & poetry in them was a minor scholastic pastime in Tibet. Tibetans
>also have whole writing systems which are supposed to represent the
>languages of dakini, demigods, various kinds of demons and other
> non-humans. There are at least a couple of hundred of these.
> I suspect there must be similar things in other cultures too.
> If the door is opened to invented scripts and languages made up
>in the English speaking world there is no real justification for not
>encoding similar things from other cultures if someone makes the
That's correct, Chris, if there are valid reasons to require their use for
character interchange in a public and standard way -- and if they are not
just bizarre glyph variants of the Tibetan Script (as Enochian and Theban
might be considered to be with regard to English). There are, clearly,
reasons for wanting to do this for Tengwar and Cirth, where there are
scholars actually interested in them and web-active enthusiasts who make
lots of use of them. Klingon and Shavian are much less attractive from
these points of view.
Sometimes I regret proposing Klingon, because it's a buzzword people like
to attack. Its use is probably less marginal than Shavian (which was used
in only 1 book, apart from being printed in lots of books about writing
None of this is going to get encoded soon. I'm going to look at the Tengwar
arguments again shortly for my own pleasure. But in the short term, we are
going to be working mostly on living scripts.
-- Michael Everson * Everson Gunn Teoranta * http://www.indigo.ie/egt 15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland Guthán: +353 1 478 2597 ** Facsa: +353 1 478 2597 (by arrangement) 27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn; Baile an Bhóthair; Co. Átha Cliath; Éire
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:54 EDT