17-06-2019, 06:56 PM
The shape of the glyphs has meaning. This is for me an essential idea because it is able to explain the structure of the script.
For example, Emma Smith has insisted that (o) and (y) are equivalent, the same class of glyph. It is a fundamental idea for her. But this key element of the structure we do not visualize it for having given an alphabetic value to the glyphs.
(o) is not the letter o, and the 9-like glyph is not an (y). It is a (o) with a tail. The structure and shape of the glyphs complement each other.
For example, Emma Smith has insisted that (o) and (y) are equivalent, the same class of glyph. It is a fundamental idea for her. But this key element of the structure we do not visualize it for having given an alphabetic value to the glyphs.
(o) is not the letter o, and the 9-like glyph is not an (y). It is a (o) with a tail. The structure and shape of the glyphs complement each other.