>ABF> If anyone's got good reasons why they think western scripts are
> > ideographic or whatever then that's fine.
>
>It is, after all, the oldest written language in Glorantha, is it not?
Invented in the Golden Age by the Tadeniti, one of the first western tribes. Spoken language was invented by the Kachasti, a different tribe.
>It makes sense to me that older written languages are more
>logographic than yonger.
Older scripts (such as Egyptian hieroglyphs, Linear-B and Cuneiform of manners of wedges) are syllabaric scripts rather than logographic. Even in the earliest days of carved Sumerian, "pictograms" could be used as rebuses, a most unlogographic technique.
>It has also been unchanged for millenia, a fate few
>alphabetical scripts survive, as people tend to spell
>as they speak.
The Roman alphabet is older than the standardized Chinese script of Shih Huang-Ti. And even the People's Republic have seen fit to introduced minor spelling reforms. Hence Western Script is Ideogrammic because it was unchanging doesn't work for me.
>There is that interesting connection to the Runes.
Like A is an ox? You also get this connection in alphabets. Hence I think the thirty standard runes is the God Learner alphabet.
>I would think that the only alphabetical script in Glorantha
>is the youngest written language, New Pelorian.
Dara Happa has had a standardized alphabet since the Plentonic reforms of 221 ST. KoS, when speaking of the EWF, implies that the Orlanthi have been so since the Imperial Age (and possibly before): "One popular theorist, Banadal of Ger, believes that these are in fact ancient letters similar to our own, and that they spell out the name by which these folks call themselves." KoS p181.
Powered by hypermail