From: Mark E. Shoulson (mark@kli.org)
Date: Tue Nov 11 2003 - 08:21:22 EST
Doug Ewell wrote:
>I think such a collection of symbols A becomes a cipher for a true
>script B when it replicates the usage of symbols in B, irregularities
>and all. In the Pigpen cipher, there is a symbol for C and one for T
>and one for H, and C+H and T+H are slapped together *exactly* as they
>are in Latin to spell English words. In a substitution cipher, the word
>"chime" is spelled with those five letters, c-h-i-m-e; they just look
>different.
>
>
>I was surprised and a bit dismayed to see Klingon dragged into this
>thread. Klingon was rejected not because it's a cipher, but because
>it's used only for decoration, not for communication.
>
We're slowly changing that usage, but that will not change the
one-to-one correspondence to the Latin transliteration (actually not
one-to-one to Latin *letters*, which may be what you meant). The
question at that point is which script one chooses to consider the
cipher and which the (or a) "true" script.
~mark
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 11 2003 - 09:11:16 EST