Oh I love you.

But I have to agree with you alot of them look artificial indeed.....

I want more info on these scripts.

I often overlook sarcasms and fish for the deeper messages. After all, in a discussion, sarcastical remarks never yield as fruitful results. Unless, the result intented is to anger the other individual. The reason that, I claim to be promoting round earth whilst you are on flat earth (not as an insult to you, please read-on before jump to conclusion) is, back in those days the flat earth was well documented by academia whilst Columbus has no proof what-so-ever for his round earth.

Thus stated, my situation is just like Columbus. Was Columbus right? No, he was wrong on many theories but, he was right about the round earth. Hence, like I have advocated for myself: I can be wrong but, I can also be right. It is the risk I have to take one way or the other.



Actually, the bushu system was not settled and standardrise until a much later time in the devolopement of the chinese writing system. During the era of jiaguwen, the bushu system might be forming but, did not really existed in the writing system. Thus, the ancient composites are not bushu composites of the modern characters.



Indeed, they do. Such is how I based my researches upon.



The writing systems of tangut (xixia), khitan small-words, lolo-yi and dongba (naxi) were not influenced by the chinese writing-system.



I have already given the proof; however, you disagreed with my proofs and, that is your right to disagree. Columbus had many who disagreed with him and, that was that. I respect your views but, like you do not agree with me, I do not stand with you on your points. Each man to his own meat.



I have stated more than once that, the so-called jindai moji is just another form of jiaguwen, have I not? Jiaguwen is much more predated the hangeul, is it not? The answer to both questions is, yes. I believe I have made myself clear; however, to agree or to disagree, that is the right of every individual.

[quote="Jeisuke"]How do you account for the time discrepancy? Please stick to these points and don't deflect to some other straw-man argument.[quote="Jeisuke"]

I have already made myself clear more than once, especially in the abovementioned responses. You have the right to disagree and, I am not denying that right of yours; the same, as I have my own right to stand firm upon my own theories.

Since we have nothing beneficial to share with each other, I remain on my original suggestion: call the topic a day until we have something beneficial to share with each other.

Per your suggestion, I shall not further kick this dead horse. I of course hold to the position that Jindaiji is a very old CONSCRIPT and will continue to post that position in anything regarding Jindaimoji

However, there is one comment you made that I can't let pass

All of these scripts are vertical. All of these script's characters are confined to a "square" or "block", just like Chinese. Throughout Chinese history, Han-characters have been predominantly vertical and before the creation of the other aforementioned scripts, they evolved into standardized square, block character....one character (or composite character) per block......hence the influence.

While I am not a huge fan of Adrian Coulmas, you would do well to read his "The Writing Systems of the World" They explain what is meant by influence, idea diffusion, and direct evolution of scripts. For example....Old Uyghur was originally written horizontally when it evolved from Sogdian...however, due to Chinese INFLUENCE, it was shifted 90 degrees. It still maintained it's Semitic origin, but the directionality changed.

I have to agree with that. Because I was looking at the scripts and alot of them look like some other conscripts ( that have nothing to do with this ) that are in my collection.

But I would like to know for sure, although I doubt I will.

I respect your right to hold your view and, that is nothing wrong about your stance. You do have more evidences from documents of which the documented evidences are what I lack. We both seek a discussion but, we have since started to argue with each other of which is not yielding anything beneficial to either of us. Thus, let's cool it off, for now.



They are inspired by the chinese writing-system but, not influenced by the chinese writing-system. In other words, unlike ones once used by the Vietnamese, the stated writings got the idea from the chinese, but then, decided to devolope their own style of words similar to the chinese writing-system instead of just borrow or modify the chinese characters.



Where you term influenced, I differentiate influenced apart from inspired. In my term and view, Old Uyghur was inspired by the chinese writing to turn vertical and, the Manchu language was influenced by the chinese language to inherite some chinese loan-words.