What does this look like?

What does this look like?
Since this doesn't quite fit as a conscript, or a natscript, I thought it might be closest to put it as a neography. However, the following don't have actual representations phonetically, and might be best described as reoccuring patterns. It's meant to be I suppose, an exercise. Below are 5 different 'scripts', you simply have to answer some simple questions regarding each 'script': - What does make you think of? - What natural script or conscript does it make you think of? - Which modern script(s) do you think this script (#) was designed and derived off of? - Does this look plausible as a script, if not, what changes would be best applied to optimize the system? - Would you consider this an alphabet, an abjad, or a logographic script, etc. Assuming it were a real script. - (insert any other comments here) Script #1 (edited for better example)

Script #2

Script #3

Script #4

Script #5

(feel free to provide your own useless designs and ask questions about what others think, as I have done with these 'script' above that I made in boredom. I will provide some answers as to the derivated script and inspiration later)

Script#2 1. It reminds me of Pallava. 2. Probably Khmer or Ahom, distantly Thai. 3. I don't know, something Brahmi derived. 4. No comment 5. This looks like an abugida, but it easily could be an alphabet. I'll go for alphabet, since each 'diacritic' seems to be an integral part of the character. There are no similar characters with different diacritics. If I'll see them, then abugida. 6. I like it. Did you make that one?

1 - Looks like lace embroidery 2 - Seems to be a repeated line, very Tengwar/Ahom-ish 3 - Why would you make that? It's kinda ugly 4 - Warshack ink blot done in a calligraphic style 5 - Uyata with diacritics

Script 1 1) Makes me think of flowers. 2) I think it's called Hindhi? Thinds are written beneath the line. 3) Like computer fonts? Reminds me of Wingdings. 4) I don't think it looks to plausible. Writing above and below the line seems a little to confusing. 5) A syllabary of some sort. Maybe if the picture is one the bottom you get a consonant and if it is on the top you get a vowel? Script 2 1) Scrolls. Old, withered, dusty, scrolls. 2) Looks like a strange combination of Tengwar and Hebrew. Very nice, actually. 3) Don't know. I think I'm starting to see some Cyrillic influence. 4) Looks plausible. I imagine it would be easy to write in. 5) I'm thinking and abugida. I see some family resemblence between characters. The diacritic markings suggest a change in pitch. 6) I kinda like it. What was the inspiration? Script 3 1) I don't know. Seems very urban. 2) It is definately jazzed up hieroglyphics. 3) Nothing modern except Wingdings. 4) I don't think it's plausible. The characters looks too hard to draw to be practical. 5) Definately a logograph. I thought the symmetry might have meaning, until I realized they were all symmetrical. 6) No offense, but I think it's kinda ugly. Script 4 1) The very first thing I thought was "Chinese characters have already been invented". 2) Looks like a cross between seal and cursive Chinese. 3) Nothing comes to mind. 4) Very plausible. Look how far the Chinese scripts have gotten. 5) It's logoraphic, no doubt about it. 6) It's awesome! How did you make it? Script 5 1) Electrical circuits. 2) Not really. Kind of like extra-blocky-cyrillic-oracle-bone-chinese 3) Nothing comes to mind. 4) Well, I guess it's kind of plausible. Perhaps it was carved in stone? 5) I can't really tell. I'm thinking a syllabary or an alphabet, and the dots modify the vowels?

Thanks The Peloric Orchid, that was more the answers I was looking for. And yes Sano, I do know the symbols repeat (as in #2), but if you read properly, I wrote that these weren't actual scripts, but potential ones, so for now all they are is a reccuring pattern. The reason is that you can see better how more of the 'script' looks like together, rather than just a word or two (I got lazy in the last 2 though). The point of all the questions is not for people to say "Oooh pretty scripty" (or the opposite), but rather to see how different people perceive a certain design, pattern or script, and it may help to develop skills on how to critique other scripts without being told a single thing about them, and how they work. For every answer given, I could simply ask "why?", "what makes it look logographic?", etc. These are things that should be answered before, and could be helpful to the future script-designer. I'm also sure the questions could be expanded to include "what direction does is the script written?", "what type of tool would be used to write this?"... And if I had posted an actual script passage, 'what seem to be the punctuations/vowels/consonants', etc. Just to provide an insight on how to think out of the box, instead of just seeing a script, not reading anything, and posting. Anyhow, I'll answer all other questions a bit later on.

And yes Sano, I do know the symbols repeat (as in #2), but if you read properly, I wrote that these weren't actual scripts, but potential ones, so for now all they are is a reccuring pattern. The reason is that you can see better how more of the 'script' looks like together, rather than just a word or two (I got lazy in the last 2 though). Oh, I was in no way trying to denigrate the script (potential), I was simply answering the question "What does this look like?", I didn't go into your sub-questions because I think your primary one was interesting enough. #1 & #3 aren't something I would like to see as scripts...they just seem too convoluted for my tastes. #2 is the most realistic, perhaps because it looks so much like Ahom, not a bad thing at all. #4 looks more or less like an ideography that has become overly decorative and has the look of something made for a teenage girl. #5 looks like a highly technical script, likely an abugida or abjad, very square and not something that most people find aesthetically pleasing, but hey, I like it.

I wish just to comment on script #4 (for at least the time being): - It looks a little like insects - I'm not sure what it really links to - I belive it has been derived from Mongolian - It looks plausible as a script but may need simplifying - I think it may be an alphabet

Re: What does this look like?
Script #1 (edited for better example) http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v138/zacinu/seksu.gif - What does make you think of? Wrought-iron scrollwork. And New Maori. - What natural script or conscript does it make you think of? None. Unless New Maori. - Which modern script(s) do you think this script (#) was designed and derived off of? As far as I can tell, none - Does this look plausible as a script, Not to me. if not, what changes would be best applied to optimize the system? I guess I can't really tell. - Would you consider this an alphabet, an abjad, or a logographic script, etc. Assuming it were a real script. It just doesn't look enough like "a real script" to me for me to answer. Script #2 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v138/zacinu/rand01_2.gif - What does make you think of? Arabic - What natural script or conscript does it make you think of? Arabic and Klingon. - Which modern script(s) do you think this script (#) was designed and derived off of? Arabic - Does this look plausible as a script? Yes. - Would you consider this an alphabet, an abjad, or a logographic script, etc. Assuming it were a real script. I would suspect an abjad; maybe an abugida. Script #3 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v138/zacinu/rand03.gif - What does make you think of? Script #1, mostly. And New Maori (more than Script #1 does). - What natural script or conscript does it make you think of? Script #1 and New Maori. - Which modern script(s) do you think this script (#) was designed and derived off of? I suspect Greek. If not Greek, Latin or Cyrillic. - Does this look plausible as a script? No. if not, what changes would be best applied to optimize the system? All of the letters are both left-right symmetrical and top-bottom symmetrical; they each have both a vertical axis-of-symmetry and a horizontal axis-of-symmetry. For a real script that's OK for a minority of letters; but I think the majority should probably have only one axis of symmetry. Perhaps about equally many could have a horizontal one as a vertical one. Also, I think some letters should have neither a horizontal nor a vertical axis of symmetry; if you want to give them some other kind of symmetry (e.g. rotational symmetry, or three-fold or five-fold symmetry, or have the mirror-line run northwest-to-southeast or northeast-to-southwest), go ahead. - Would you consider this an alphabet, an abjad, or a logographic script, etc. Assuming it were a real script. When I try to look at halves and quarters of these characters, I see capital letters in Latin and Greek alphabets; I would guess it is either an alphabet, or a "syllable-block" system whose smaller parts were "alphabetical", like Hangul. Script #4 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v138/zacinu/rando04.gif - What does make you think of? Dingbats, and Chinese. - What natural script or conscript does it make you think of? Chinese. - Which modern script(s) do you think this script (#) was designed and derived off of? Chinese. - Does this look plausible as a script? No. if not, what changes would be best applied to optimize the system? The characters are all almost-mirror-symmetrical about a vertical axis-of-symmetry; all but one are fully symmetrical. For a real system, it would be OK for nearly all the characters to be symmetrical, provided (1) most of them aren't too symmetrical (e.g. symmetrical in more than one way) and (2) only a minority of them exhibit each kind of symmetry. - Would you consider this an alphabet, an abjad, or a logographic script, etc. Assuming it were a real script. I'd figure it was logographic. It's too elaborate to be a syllabary; though I suppose it could be like Hangul, I don't think it is. Script #5 http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v138/zacinu/rand05.gif - What does make you think of? One of Sano's scripts that he's posted here. (forumer.com/viewtopic.php?p=12&highlight=script%2A#12>Uyata.) - What natural script or conscript does it make you think of? forumer.com/viewtopic.php?p=12&highlight=script%2A#12>Uyata or 'Phags-pa - Which modern script(s) do you think this script (#) was designed and derived off of? I suspect none, but maybe 'Phags-pa. - Does this look plausible as a script? No. if not, what changes would be best applied to optimize the system? All lines are vertical or horizontal; all lines are straight; all angles are right-angles. There are real scripts made of all straight lines, but most of them allow non-right-angles, and orientations other than horizontal and vertical. There are real scripts whose straight lines are all horizontal or vertical, but most of them also allow curved lines. Of course, 'Phags-pa, in one of its uses, does look like that. But notice that Sano's "brushed" version of Uyata, as well as most other versions of 'Phags-pa, are more varied. - Would you consider this an alphabet, an abjad, or a logographic script, etc. Assuming it were a real script. An abjad for a language without many consonants. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 - Warshack ink blot done in a calligraphic style Rorschach, perhaps?

View Full Version: What does this look like?