Re: Abiding Script (etc).

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:18:15 +0100

Trotsky:
> Well, clearly it includes Gloranthan runes, especially since it will
> have logical formulae in it. That doesn't mean that one can't usefully
> describe the script as being alphabetic, any more than one would argue
> that a maths textbook (or the HeroQuest rules) aren't in alphabetic
> English just because they include logographic symbols. I don't think
> that's been disputed by anyone...

Well, just to be ultra-pedantic (shock!), I'd have said that in (all) these cases, they'd have more of the character of ideograms than of logograms; they're trans-linguistic, and don't even necessarily have a fixed "reading" even in a given language. (Witness "Change" vs "Motion" vs. "Mobility" vs. "Mastakos" vs "Larnste" vs "Movement" vs... did I miss any?)

Cheers,
Alex.

--__--__--