Jindaimoji debate

The place to discuss alphabets and other writing systems.

Re: Jindaimoji debate

Postby Serali » Sat 28 Nov 2009 3:38 am

kaenif wrote:http://miko.org/~uraki/kuon/furu/text/sindaimonji/sindaimonji.htm

Here is a collection of Jindai Moji. Don't know if these are the ones you were talking about, but according to me they look quite artificial, and show little to no resemblance. Some work in the way like hangul, while some in a syllabary, and some like Ge'ez.

Some shapes are just weird. Like a bunch of (crop) circles in 上津(かみつ)文字.


Oh I love you. :mrgreen:

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

I want more info on these scripts.

Image
Native Language: English
Languages I'm Interested In: Korean
Favorite Writing Systems: Too many to name

And the boingies will take over the world!

Wapo Gipo Mi Mi Mi! n_n
User avatar
Serali
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun 28 Jun 2009 1:28 pm

Re: Jindaimoji debate

Postby VROOR » Sat 28 Nov 2009 4:00 pm

Jeisuke wrote:I was sarcastically implying that you, yourself were promoting a linguistic "flat earth" theory. You do realize that..right?


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.

Jeisuke wrote:Of course many characters are composites; composed of elements (Bushu部首).


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.

Jeisuke wrote:Of course, for a large percentage of them, one element gives a hint to the meaning, and the other gives a hint to the reading.


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

Jeisuke wrote:Of course, Kanji(漢字) greatly and profoundly influenced the the writing of East Asia (Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Xixia, Jurchen, Khitan, Lolo-yi, Naxi, Lisu, Miao, Yao...and a few more that I'm forgetting). These are not what I am in disagreement about. This is all common knowledge for anyone who has studied Kanji(漢字)....which I have done as I am fluent in Japanese. You are making straw man arguments.


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

Jeisuke wrote:What is being challenged is your claim about Jindaimoji, it's influence on Hangeul, and it's age. You haven't proven that Jindaimoji is ANCIENT nor have you proven its usage prior to the invention of Hangeul and the Imjin invasion (which undoubtedly brought the concept of Hangeul into view of the Japanese invaders).


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.

Jeisuke wrote:Historically, you have put the cart before the horse as I previously pointed out that Hangeul is recorded as having been developed in the 14~15th century and Jindaimoji did not come about until the 17th.


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.
Image
ImageImage
User avatar
VROOR
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Thu 13 Aug 2009 6:40 pm
Location: Taiwan (R.O.C)

Re: Jindaimoji debate

Postby Jeisuke » Sat 28 Nov 2009 8:41 pm

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

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.
Jeisuke
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu 13 Aug 2009 3:21 pm
Location: SoCal (Formerly: Yokohama, JPN)

Re: Jindaimoji debate

Postby Serali » Sat 28 Nov 2009 10:20 pm

Jeisuke wrote: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


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.

Image
Native Language: English
Languages I'm Interested In: Korean
Favorite Writing Systems: Too many to name

And the boingies will take over the world!

Wapo Gipo Mi Mi Mi! n_n
User avatar
Serali
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun 28 Jun 2009 1:28 pm

Re: Jindaimoji debate

Postby VROOR » Sun 29 Nov 2009 12:47 pm

Jeisuke wrote: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


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.

Jeisuke wrote:However, there is one comment you made that I can't let pass
The writing systems of tangut (xixia), khitan small-words, lolo-yi and dongba (naxi) were not influenced by the chinese writing-system.

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.


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.

Jeisuke wrote: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.


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.
Image
ImageImage
User avatar
VROOR
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Thu 13 Aug 2009 6:40 pm
Location: Taiwan (R.O.C)

Previous

Return to Writing systems

Who is online

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

cron