>As to magic being a non-verbal concept, I agree, though I assume that the
>"language" or sorcery is more akin to mathematics than to language.
This is the exact opposite of the case. Magic is explicitly linguistic, and it's the relative efficacy of different magical languages which for the most part determines, for example, that Malkionism is expanding and the hsunchen peoples are beset by a sea of troubles. Note that a precise boundary cannot be placed between "magic" and "society." Malkioni magic is intimately bound up in its beliefs, which in turn strongly influence society. Society, in turn, sets the framework for the language, so as to form a feedback loop.
>Or,
>rather, I suspect that the language/symbolism/notation of sorcery is rather
>ill-suited to day-to-day communication.
This may be true. But if you could speak and be understood in an innately-magical language, you could accomplish a good bit.
End of Glorantha Digest V2 #429
WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html
Powered by hypermail