Minhast: Difference between revisions

23 bytes removed ,  30 August 2014
m
Line 277: Line 277:
The Tašširkantaft was modified from the original Baybayin to map a base glyph and its variants to certain related phonemes (e.g. the base glyph &lt;b&gt; and its variants to the labial consonants).  For example, the glyphs for the labials &lt;b&gt;, &lt;p&gt;, and <f> are based on the glyph &lt;b&gt;.  Additions of dashes to the base glyph distinguish voiced, unvoiced, and fricatives.  This explains why there is less variability in the Tašširkantaft script.  The glyphs for the dentals /d/ and /t/ in the Baybayin are represented by two separate glyphs; in contrast the glyphs in the Tašširkantaft for these same phonemes differ from each other only by the addition of a dash to the base glyph <d> to derive the glyph <t> .  As can be seen from the chart, the voiced consonant is assigned the base glyph, and dashes are added to this base glyph for unvoiced and fricatives for a given phonemic class (labials, dentals, aleveolars, etc). The Tašširkantaft is thus more economical.
The Tašširkantaft was modified from the original Baybayin to map a base glyph and its variants to certain related phonemes (e.g. the base glyph &lt;b&gt; and its variants to the labial consonants).  For example, the glyphs for the labials &lt;b&gt;, &lt;p&gt;, and <f> are based on the glyph &lt;b&gt;.  Additions of dashes to the base glyph distinguish voiced, unvoiced, and fricatives.  This explains why there is less variability in the Tašširkantaft script.  The glyphs for the dentals /d/ and /t/ in the Baybayin are represented by two separate glyphs; in contrast the glyphs in the Tašširkantaft for these same phonemes differ from each other only by the addition of a dash to the base glyph <d> to derive the glyph <t> .  As can be seen from the chart, the voiced consonant is assigned the base glyph, and dashes are added to this base glyph for unvoiced and fricatives for a given phonemic class (labials, dentals, aleveolars, etc). The Tašširkantaft is thus more economical.


Each glyph of the Tašširkantaft has a default underlying vowel /a/; all other vowels must be marked explicitly attached to the vowel signs (indicated in the lower right-hand corner; the box is simply a representation of where the base glyph would be located). I still have to formulate how the long vowels would be represented, as they are phonemically significant, but most likely it's going to be a vertical dash through the diamonds representing the short vowels &lt;u&gt; and &lt;e&gt;, and a horizontal one between the diamonds of the vowel &lt;i&gt;.
Each glyph of the Tašširkantaft has a default underlying vowel /a/; all other vowels must be marked explicitly attached to the vowel signs (indicated in the lower right-hand corner; the box is simply a representation of where the base glyph would be located). Long vowels are represented by a vertical dash through the diamonds representing the short vowels &lt;u&gt; and &lt;e&gt;, and a horizontal one between the diamonds of the vowel &lt;i&gt;.
 
The Tašširkantaft, unlike the Baybayin, is written vertically, from right to left.


One striking difference between the two writing systems is the angularity of the Tašširkantaft vs. the Baybayin.  The Tašširkantaft consists of straight lines and is very angular, whereas the Baybayin is wavy.  This is because the Tašširkantaft was originally carved into wooden planks, as is still done today among the Salmon Speakers; writing on a hard writing surface is easier with straight lines than curvy shapes.   
One striking difference between the two writing systems is the angularity of the Tašširkantaft vs. the Baybayin.  The Tašširkantaft consists of straight lines and is very angular, whereas the Baybayin is wavy.  This is because the Tašširkantaft was originally carved into wooden planks, as is still done today among the Salmon Speakers; writing on a hard writing surface is easier with straight lines than curvy shapes.   
5,464

edits