View Full Version: Collaborative Proto-Script?

scriptorium >>Conscripts, Conlangs and Conworlds >>Collaborative Proto-Script?


<< Prev | Next >>

Sano- 01-25-2008
Collaborative Proto-Script?
I had an idea of creating a collaborative script... Using 9 basic elements (with potential of adding more), creating small pictographs that we could evolve into a mother-script, and then derive daughter scripts from, just as languages evolve. The nine basic elements. Some random samples: Thoughts, suggestions, ideas?

Mambawaba- 01-25-2008

That's the kind of challenges i was talking about, just fun stuff to play, here: If you set the rules for no scaling then some of this are of, if no intersections are allowed then most of them are.. Cheers!

Hakaku- 01-25-2008

Interesting, how about : Are there any guidelines, as in can lines connect? Can the length or sizes of certain elements vary?

Sano- 01-26-2008

Are there any guidelines, as in can lines connect? Can the length or sizes of certain elements vary? Ok, lets try to keep it simple and easy to follow. 1) Scaling and size variation should be kept to a minimum, perhaps no more than one element per glyph. 2) Connection and intersection of elements should also be kept to a minimum. 3) For each glyph, there is a maximum of 5 glyph elements and other than the initial nine, a minimum of two. We can edit these later in need be. Mambawaba, I had thought of using a number system that I made a while back: As you can tell, the 'dot' is, as of now, the tenth element. Agreed?

Mambawaba- 01-29-2008

Hakaku i like yours,just one sugestion, the rain could have 3 vertical lines and this one with 4 could be for column? looks like a greek jonic column. and with just 2 on the sides could mean "construction/building"? what do you think? Sano i like mine becouse you can actually count the segments, on the other hand has lots of intersections. Yours works fine, just has a little more complicated logic, its your call.

Hakaku- 02-01-2008

It doesn't bother me for the number system, you could always have both as variants; and maybe be incorporated in the daughter scripts we could eventually derive ourselves. Or it could be short-hand alternatives? Anyhow, I provided a fix based on Mambawaba's opinion, and I've added some more (although I realize some conflict with Mambawaba's, so any suggestions for different meanings appreciated). Feel free to comment on any of these characters, whether they suit the symbol or not. Oh, and I'm also going to assume the script is written horizontally right?

Sano- 02-03-2008

Or it could be short-hand alternatives? Well, yes, but most of the time short-hand is somewhat related to that which it is used to represent... Oh, and I'm also going to assume the script is written horizontally right? Well, it is a proto-script still, so setting a fixed writing direction or style, might not be a good idea, keep in mind, that the daughter scripts to come could be written in any way that suits the lang/creator/script, so lets keep it to the fundamentals as of now. BTW, Hakaku, your la-*test*-('") addition is quite well done, and I like the definitions a lot. I think we should try to keep a common theme in many of these glyphs...as well as a common size and shape to them...in this way we will be able to better associate the daughter graphemes. Mambawaba, if you could please, try to do copy paste so that we can all share and edit each others images...I did a bit to your contribution so that it "fits".

Hakaku- 03-05-2008

Not really much, I just felt like continuing the thread. I've added animals/insects and the such :

Sano- 03-07-2008

Not really much, I just felt like continuing the thread. I've added animals/insects and the such : It's good, but I do think the centipede glyph has too many components, and the mussel kinda looks like an ear.

Hakaku- 03-13-2008

It's good, but I do think the centipede glyph has too many components, and the mussel kinda looks like an ear. True, I couldn't think of any other way to design a mussel. As for the centipede, I modelled it on the Rongorongo pictograph of a centipede. I'll see to removing some parts next time I have time to make more. How many more glyphs should we work to until it's safe to derive daughter scripts?

Sano- 03-14-2008

How many more glyphs should we work to until it's safe to derive daughter scripts? 50? 100?...IDK, it's really up to those who plan on creating the derivations and what phonemes/words are important to them. Remember, we haven't been assigning sounds, just ideas, so the process, AFAICT is still in the first stage.

eldin raigmore- 03-15-2008

How many more glyphs should we work to until it's safe to derive daughter scripts?How many "radicals" do well-known logographies have? Isn't it between 214 and 614 or some other ridiculously precise figure like that? If you allow all combinations of three primitive glyphs, you can get at least 161,700 such combinations from just 100 primitive glyphs. (If order counts, up to six times that number; and that leaves out combinations of fewer than three primitives.) So that should be enough for most languages' lexicons, shouldn't it? If you only allow all combinations of two primitive glyphs, you can get at least 19,900 such combinations from just 200 primitive glyphs. So that should be enough to cover almost any conlang's lexicon. If you have 50 primitives and allow combinations of three, you could have at least 19,600 of them. With only 9 primitives, you'd need combinations of at least 4 to get up to 6,000 combinations, and at least 5 to get up to 59,000 combinations. I think combinations of 5 or more primitives is not really realistic. Nevertheless if you could combine 6 primitives, you'd have over 500,000 combinations. That is, 9^6 > 500,000. I think you'd need between, say 63 and 156 primitives. There are almost 600,000 combinations of 4 out of 63 things; and over 600,000 combinations fo 3 out of 156 things.

Forumer™ is Voted #1 Free Forum Hosting provider
Build your own community today with the largest message board hosting company.