Inside-out abugida script?

Irtaviš Ačankif · January 11, 2012, 12:23:44 AM

An abugida, as you probably all know, is a system where consonants are notated and mandatory diacritics are used to denote the vowels. However, is there an abugida in reverse? I mean, is there any system where vowels are notated and diacritics are used for the consonants?

For example, a Latin-based ordinary abugida for English would look like this:
ⁱM ^uSⁱNg ^aN ^aB^uGⁱD^a

While the system I'm thinking about would be this:
I_m U_sI_ng etc

Some languages are vowel-important, and others are consonant-important. Na'vi, for example, is a very vowel-important language. A Na'vi sentence with the consonants removed would still be somewhat intelligible (guess what oeä ian u ìan ìan is for example) but with the vowels removed, whole words (like oe, eo, 'ia) get removed. On the other hand, Semitic languages are consonant-important, with the vowels in between mainly conveying grammatical information.

I think that for vowel-important languages, a reversed abugida would be a very good solution, since for example "meoauniaea" would be hard to write in an abugida and still retain the structure of one character per syllable. In addition, complex consonant clusters (think "tstxo") would require non-syllabic characters again. However, in a reversed abugida, "tstxo" could still be one symbol for "o" with tiny diacritics for t, s, and tx stacked on top of it.

'Oma Tirea · January 13, 2012, 12:18:40 AM

I once created an alphabet with this system, although I was using paint for the symbols and, aesthetically speaking, needs tweaking. You can see pics in my gallery (under Oeyä Alphabet).

Irtaviš Ačankif · January 13, 2012, 12:37:49 AM

Actually I posted this because I was inventing a script based on it, just like you. My system is for Na'vi ONLY though and is tightly integrated with the grammatical and phonological structure of Na'vi. However, I don't know how to make it into a font...

'Oma Tirea · January 13, 2012, 01:08:23 AM

Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on January 13, 2012, 12:37:49 AM
Actually I posted this because I was inventing a script based on it, just like you. My system is for Na'vi ONLY though and is tightly integrated with the grammatical and phonological structure of Na'vi. However, I don't know how to make it into a font...

It has crossed my mind to do a Na''vi nì'aw version of my script. It could require special letters for case endings and infixes, and maybe even prefixes. You could even have special signs for special words such as "Na'vi", "Eywa", and "Kelutral."

Etrìpa syayvi with making your script into a font. There should be some tools out there to help you. Srefereiey nìprrte

Irtaviš Ačankif · January 13, 2012, 02:40:42 AM

Why does it always seem that we share the same mind on this? In fact, infixes, case endings, and prefixes are *exactly* what I planned to be the logographic features of the script - a purely phonetic one like the 'Eoio font here would be cumbersome.

'Oma Tirea · January 13, 2012, 02:54:00 AM

Here's another idea (IIRC I used this for my script): instead of the letter centering around a baseline or hangline, they could center around a midline, like in Ogham.

Quote from: Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng on January 13, 2012, 02:40:42 AM
Why does it always seem that we share the same mind on this? In fact, infixes, case endings, and prefixes are *exactly* what I planned to be the logographic features of the script - a purely phonetic one like the 'Eoio font here would be cumbersome.

Probably because I've already done some thought on this although my implementation of it was ****.

Irtaviš Ačankif · January 13, 2012, 02:56:40 AM

My idea is to stack syllable initial diacritics on top of the vowel and stack codas underneath it. That way it looks balanced and easy to read. Any ideas though on how to notate affixes [This is getting off topic could you please or could me please start a separate thread]

`Eylan Ayfalulukanä · January 14, 2012, 03:35:45 AM

Very intriguing idea, especially stacking the inital consonants as super scripts (or on top) and the coda consonants as subscripts (or on the bottom). The idea of assigning a symbol to infixes, etc. has also been batted around before, and I am sure you have seen some of the discussions. There are (strong) differing opinions on the validity of this idea.

I am going post your question on the Language Creation Society forum, and see what thoughts the LCS folks have on it!

'Oma Tirea · January 17, 2012, 12:54:39 AM

One thing I have noted against this, ta T. A., is how it's read. T. A. commented it was like reading in a zig-zag fashion.

Still, an alphabet works with everything and is all too easy, an idepgraphic system or syllabry is too much for some to handle (although not entirely out of the question), and abjad and normal abugida systems rely too much on consonants (normal abugida is possible, although given that Na'vi is vowel-heavy, I favor an inverse abugida). Finally, this system is special in how affixes are treated.

Quote from: `Eylan Ayfalulukanä on January 14, 2012, 03:35:45 AM
I am going post your question on the Language Creation Society forum, and see what thoughts the LCS folks have on it!

Hopefully something positive

Irtaviš Ačankif · January 17, 2012, 01:21:55 AM

Have you ever read Khmer script before? It is much more zigzaggy than this! It has circumscribed diacritics and also diacritics on top, bottom, left, right, and also stacked characters in arbitrary ways. I wonder about the average reading speed of the Khmer people...

This system is basically, structurally, similar to Tibetan script except it is turned inside out with the vowels in the middle.