> Isn't there a source that claimed that all Westerners can read the
>script, even though they pronounce it differently?
It's not stated that they pronounce it differently.
>It's kind of hard to
>imagine this with characters representing sounds or syllables,
There's actually two examples, both which have been mooted in the past. The first is Latin, which everybody read in medieval times although they spoke their own vulgate. The second is Arabic, which is difficult to represent dialects without making it unreadable - hence the practice is to write down a dialect speaker's words in flawless arabic. The reader, supplied with the information of the speaker's origin, is then able to figure out what the speaker actually said based on his own knowledge. If he doesn't know what the speaker sounds like, he still can understand what the words say.
> Consider the idea further derided -- surely Sartari is descended
>from Stormspeech, Pelorian from some ur-Solar tongue, Western from
>Brithini, etc.
Western does not arise from Brithini as the Brithini are a late development. All the languages of the west arises from the Spoken Language of the Kachasti.
--Peter Metcalfe
--__--__--
Powered by hypermail