Ўот aбaўт Pьшьн? (What about Russian?)

The place to discuss alphabets and other writing systems.

Re: Ўот aбaўт Pьшьн? (What about Russian?)

Postby choc_pud » Wed 01 Jan 2014 10:51 pm

Oh, I wasn't suggesting that English be written definitely with the Cyrillic script, more that as an intellectual exercise I was wondering how you'd go about it. Latin certainly does look a lot nicer than Cyrillic, and of course doesn't have the negative overtones that Cyrillic has though its Soviet history.

I designed a script once with only eighteen letters, for writing English, but it required the extensive use of a diacritic. It's got capital and miniscule letters and looks something akin to Armenian; unfortunately I cannot upload any pictures of it.

I've always been a big fan of reintroducing the Anglo-Saxon letters æ, ð, þ, ȝ and ƿ for the writing of English; I've invented several new orthographies which would incorporate all of those quite nicely. What do you think of such a notion?

Ðe beȝsc hȝūs on ðe seorfis ov ðe loch imprest ōl, including ðe Frencc cƿīn, bīfor scī heord ðæt simfonī ageȝn, cgust as ȝung Arþur ƿonted.

Ƿot dū ȝū þinc?

(PS: I was the first person to post in 2014, hooray!)
Þu forstanden myccel gód Ængliscum!
Du forstår mal godt dansk!
Du verstehest sehr gut Deutsch!
Vous comprend trés bon, á la français!
Вы знат очынь хорошо па-Русский!
Folchen þeo meor goð Sursðk!
Du farstanden rijt gut Norslandich!
User avatar
choc_pud
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri 21 Sep 2012 12:53 am

Re: Ўот aбaўт Pьшьн? (What about Russian?)

Postby Mikhail » Sun 05 Jan 2014 4:27 am

choc_pud wrote:Oh, I wasn't suggesting that English be written definitely with the Cyrillic script, more that as an intellectual exercise I was wondering how you'd go about it.

Ok, so for example when I would go on with my conscript and try to apply on some English text, I would somehow radically simplify the spelling first something like:
chop shop -> 4op $op
would -> wud
wood -> wod
It will reduce some statistical calculations a bit probably, but I am not workin on it really. I spent most the time with graphical design.

Ðe beȝsc hȝūs on ðe seorfis ov ðe loch imprest ōl, including ðe Frencc cƿīn, bīfor scī heord ðæt simfonī ageȝn, cgust as ȝung Arþur ƿonted.
Ƿot dū ȝū þinc?

It definitely reminds of tengwaritis :) I woulde even say I dont know how to make it more tengwaritis :)
native: Russian
know good: English, German

my constructed alphabet: Scythian
Mikhail
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2012 6:11 am

Re: Ўот aбaўт Pьшьн? (What about Russian?)

Postby choc_pud » Mon 06 Jan 2014 9:06 pm

Hmm, an interesting way of "simplifying" the English spelling. What you've done there is introduce more homophony and greater ambiguity in spelling; the only one I would vouch for is the changing of <would> to <wud>.

Tegwaritis, ey? In what way does it induce dyslexia or tengwaritis? All I've done is reintroduce the letters used in Old English, none of which besides ƿ look anything like the current lettering. In my mind it has actually cleared things up rather, as there is now only one way of spelling any given word.

Maybe the best thing to do with the English spelling is to have each country in which English is a native or official language design a new orthography to better suit their own accents and pronunciations; it could then even be written in a different script (for example in India, where the Devanagari alphabet could be used).
Þu forstanden myccel gód Ængliscum!
Du forstår mal godt dansk!
Du verstehest sehr gut Deutsch!
Vous comprend trés bon, á la français!
Вы знат очынь хорошо па-Русский!
Folchen þeo meor goð Sursðk!
Du farstanden rijt gut Norslandich!
User avatar
choc_pud
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri 21 Sep 2012 12:53 am

Re: Ўот aбaўт Pьшьн? (What about Russian?)

Postby Mikhail » Thu 09 Jan 2014 10:50 pm

choc_pud wrote:Hmm, an interesting way of "simplifying" the English spelling. What you've done there is introduce more homophony and greater ambiguity in spelling; the only one I would vouch for is the changing of <would> to <wud>.

I was making an example of intermediate spelling for applying my custom writing. So I cut down the vowels to one character on the purpose, but the consonants, on the opposite, I want to be represented more exactly and without ligatures. Intuitionally I feel that consonants are much more important for visual perception, so I would examine consonants first, and don't care much of vowels.
choc_pud wrote:Tegwaritis, ey?

No? I think Latin has already a certain grade of Tengwaritis in it. Look at these two groups:
qpdbh, oce
And you make those a bit wider:
qpdbhþƿ, ðoōce
What is worse - letter ƿ. In the wolrd of visual perception (unless you invent a cipher) two characters that "look almost the same" are "just the same". So it seems to me that you use the same character for two absolutely different sounds. Thus "pot" becomes "ƿot" and vice versa.
native: Russian
know good: English, German

my constructed alphabet: Scythian
Mikhail
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2012 6:11 am

Re: Ўот aбaўт Pьшьн? (What about Russian?)

Postby choc_pud » Sat 11 Jan 2014 9:04 pm

If you think Latin has tengwaritis, what about Armenian? The letters ա, բ, դ, ե, է, ը, ի, լ, խ, կ, հ, ղ, մ ,ն, ո, յ ,պ ,ո ,ռ, ս ,վ, տ ,ր, ւ, and և all look very similar, particularly ո and ռ; and what about գ, զ, ց and ք!? The Armenian alphabet does look nice though, IMHO.

That is of course the problem with ƿ and p, they would then have to form a minimal pair, as it were. Though often one sees the letter lambda instead of an A in advertising, which could not be done in Greek, for example. Finish has a similar problem when writing German loan words, as the Germanic ü looks, when handwritten, very similar to the native Finnish ii.
Þu forstanden myccel gód Ængliscum!
Du forstår mal godt dansk!
Du verstehest sehr gut Deutsch!
Vous comprend trés bon, á la français!
Вы знат очынь хорошо па-Русский!
Folchen þeo meor goð Sursðk!
Du farstanden rijt gut Norslandich!
User avatar
choc_pud
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri 21 Sep 2012 12:53 am

Re: Ўот aбaўт Pьшьн? (What about Russian?)

Postby Mikhail » Sun 12 Jan 2014 1:25 pm

Armenian and Georgian are both severe form of tengwaritis, I think. But they were invented so long ago, so it is hard to expect much.
But what I find really strange, that some relatively modern writings, like korean hangul, are made so 'unreadable'. It was developed "from scratch" in 15 century, just the same time when Latin has finally evolved to its modern form.
When we talk about graphical beauty, I would say mayan writing is very interesting for me. The logograms are made with so much style and despite a great quantity of characters, they are very diverse in form. It is really great work the people have done about it.

choc_pud wrote:Finish has a similar problem when writing German loan words, as the Germanic ü looks, when handwritten, very similar to the native Finnish ii.

Again about Latin, I have noticed that letters 'u' and 'n', when beeing repeated or stay together often, cause some negative optical effect, for example in German widespread ending -nung. And finnish texts have similar problem, there are too much 'uu' in it.
And the one I have mentioned earlier, pair 'c' and 'e' sometimes cause similar effects. What is interesting, in english or italian spelling I don't notice any problems with it. But in german, the combination 'sch' and syllable 'seh' are somewhat very common and thus causes optical conflicts sometimes. By the way, why not use just 'sh' like in english spelling? Looks better and more compact.
native: Russian
know good: English, German

my constructed alphabet: Scythian
Mikhail
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2012 6:11 am

Re: Ўот aбaўт Pьшьн? (What about Russian?)

Postby choc_pud » Thu 16 Jan 2014 8:46 pm

Definitely, though I would say that Armenian has it worse. Why do you say "But they were invented a long time ago, so it is hard to expect much"? They are newer than the Greek and Latin alphabets, which show a much lesser degree of homoglyphy. An older than Cyrillic, which is almost as bad! So I personally don't see how age of a script could be related to tengwaritis.

I amn't sure where the trigraph sch used in German came from, but I do know the history of the sh used in English: Originally sc was used in Old English when using the Latin script for the sh sound, which later became sch under the influence of Norman French. This spelling was used throughout the Middle Ages but later became simplified to sh.

What is your opinion on the Ghurmurki script used for Punjabi? I see a lot of it around at times and I think it looks nice, but I've had some difficulty learning it.
Þu forstanden myccel gód Ængliscum!
Du forstår mal godt dansk!
Du verstehest sehr gut Deutsch!
Vous comprend trés bon, á la français!
Вы знат очынь хорошо па-Русский!
Folchen þeo meor goð Sursðk!
Du farstanden rijt gut Norslandich!
User avatar
choc_pud
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri 21 Sep 2012 12:53 am

Re: Ўот aбaўт Pьшьн? (What about Russian?)

Postby Mikhail » Sun 19 Jan 2014 5:00 am

choc_pud wrote:Why do you say "But they were invented a long time ago, so it is hard to expect much"?
Yep, I said that ... but now I don't know what exactly I've meant :) probably the fact, that those did not change much since 5th century, according to wikipedia. Yes they are newer than the Greek, and Latin and that is exactly why I was wondering, so it should have been the same old question "why the other didn't follow Latin instead of strange experiments?". The scolars, who made up the new systems back then were probably aware of Latin and Greek.
choc_pud wrote:Cyrillic, which is almost as bad!

I would tend to disagree. I would say Cyrillic looks for me almost as Greek Uncial, the modern Cyrillic font however beeing more "latinised" (a bit clumsy , though. I suppose the latinisation was one of the reforms of our great reformer Peter the Great). So it is sort of "stuck" together with Greek somewhere in early medieval, but I wouldn't even compare with Armenian by means of readability.
choc_pud wrote:What is your opinion on the Ghurmurki script

I think it is esthetically nice, the characters are quite rich in form and I see here usage of ascenders and descenders. But the headstroke line seems to me not the best thing in it , it out-weighs the characters somehow ... but makes the look original on the other hand. And tengwaritis still lives, I must say :)
native: Russian
know good: English, German

my constructed alphabet: Scythian
Mikhail
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2012 6:11 am

Previous

Return to Writing systems

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest