LL-L "Orthography" 2003.09.25 (07) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 26.SEP.2003 (07) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
Posting Address: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
You have received this because you have been subscribed upon request.
To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l" as message
text from the same account to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or
sign off at http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Sandy Fleming [sandy at scotstext.org]
Subject: "Orthography"

> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Orthography
>
> [...]
>
> (Of these, Javanese, Balinese and Tibetan are derived from Indic scripts.)
>
> I find the looks of Roman, Cyrillic, Greek, Hebrew and most Indic scripts
> very pleasing too, besides being stylistically very versatile.

Of course, these have had thousands of years of development behind them - I
wonder that some of them aren't a bit better-looking than they are,
considering!

There's another effect here, though. I can't read Chinese and the writing
system looks rather ugly to me. This is in spite of the fact that there are
plenty of writing systems I can't read which look very beautiful to me!
Reading into how Chinese writing works a bit makes it seem even worse -
what, all this pictography and I have to know something about representing
sounds too?! I don't think Chinese will become beautiful for me until I
understand enough of the function as well as the form.

I suspect it's somewhat the same with you and SignWriting. If you learned a
sign language properly you'd realise that sign language production is really
complex - there are even quite recent books that present arguments on why
sign languages can't be written, even in theory. If you could fully
appreciate how one sign language works and then see it written in this
system, you'd be able to see how breathtaking it is that so much information
about shape, speed, rhythm, movement, emotion, and contact can be put down
so simply. It's like the way mathematical equations aren't beautiful because
of the way they look - it's because of the way they work. We're not talking
about a few resonators and flaps producing forty-odd phonemes to be laid
down in a row!

Sandy
http://scotstext.org/

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Orthography

Sandy,

> I don't think Chinese will become beautiful for me until I understand
enough of the function
> as well as the form.

Fair enough.  And there you go!  This proves that this esthetic thing is
subjective and is, at least for some people, dependent on understanding
(which I assume goes hand in hand with some people being able and others
unable to appreciate abstract visual art and poetry irrespective of intended
meaning -- which might have something to do with brain hemisphere use).
While I can not remember ever thinking that Chinese script was ugly, I do
admit that years, decades of exposure -- both to the script itself and to
its calligraphic use -- plus own my training and pursuit, have hightened my
sense of appreciation.

However, it is important to understand that in most Chinese calligraphic
styles, the meaning of the text itself is not very important, if it has any
importance at all.  It goes beyond mere "pretty writing" (which there is
also, in everyday and commercial use).  It has taken on a life of its own
and should really be viewed as a separate discipline or field.  (I am under
the impression that this can also be said of many ornamental Arabic
calligraphic styles, rarely of "Western" calligraphy, perhaps with the
exception of some medieval and early post-medieval styles.)   Artistic
Chinese (and Japanese) calligraphy is traditionally considered the ultimate
discipline within the visual arts, and calligraphic stroke techniques are
basic to traditional-style Chinese painting.  (Paintings are "written," so
to speak.)  This sort of thing might be likened to "Western" abstract art.
There isn't any prescribed "meaning" per se; what is important is what sorts
of emotions the shape of strokes, the apparent degree of speed and
abstraction, and the relationship or tension between ink and empty space
evoke in the viewer, and this may not be the same as what the artist felt
and intended.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

================================END===================================
* Please submit postings to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
* Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
  to be sent to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or at
  http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
=======================================================================