On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Andy Heninger wrote:
> From: "Miikka-Markus Alhonen"
> > Stefan Persson replied
> > > > Can you prove that this doesn't apply to any of the scripts
> > > > already in the
> > > > Standard? No, you can't, as it is not known under which circumstances
> > > > Latin, Greek, Kanji, etc., were created.
> >
> > What about "a script that was invented by one person with the principal
> > intention of representing an artificially constructed language"?
>
> Tighten up the definition of an "artificially constructed language" to
> be one that has never had native speakers, and you're there. Separate
> the evolution of the spoken language from the evolution of the script.
That sounds better, but that definition of "artificially constructed
language" would still include some planned languages and artificial
"standard" versions of languages.
Thomas Chan
tc31@cornell.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sun Mar 17 2002 - 17:11:33 EST