Re: Re: Tibetan for Auld Wyrmish

From: Mikko Rintasaari <mikrin_at_...>
Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2003 15:00:08 +0300 (EEST)


> > My private suspicion is that Auld Wyrmish's written form should be somewhat
> > more alien. That is, pretty much every earthly written language either uses
> > symbols to represent spoken sounds, or uses symbols to represent words--but
> > in either case, the written form is a way of recording things you could say.
> > Somehow I suspect that AW is a bit weirder. Perhaps the symbols don't map
> > neatly to Auld Wyrmish words. Or if the written form *does* mirror speech,
> > you might need to have several intertwining sequences, representing sounds,
> > smells, visual effects, and psychic impressions?
>
> Perhaps written Auld Wyrmish is on the order of Phoenician or Hebrew,
> which only write consonants. So you can't decipher an Auld Wyrmish
> inscription unless you actually know the language and can fill in the
> unwritten pieces.

That's what I was thinking. With the empathic components and draconic logic the written EWF is only intelligable to draconic thinkers (or with heavy use of Lankhor Mhy, or the like, translation magic.

        -Adept

Powered by hypermail