New to Typophile? Accounts are free, and easy to set up.
Lacking ascenders?
Posted by joshua.erickson in
10 Oct 2007 — 12:58pm
10 Oct 2007 — 12:58pm
An acquaintance and I were recently discussing language reform (Pitman, Deseret, Shavian, Quickscript, etc.) He told me that the lack of ascenders and descenders alone is enough to damn any writing system to failure. But aren't there examples of existing (or once existing) writing systems that disprove this notion. For example, Chinese seems to lack these features (ascenders and descenders).
User login
Support our Sponsors
10 Oct 2007 — 1:05pm
I think for this discussion you need to differentiate between alphabetic writing systems (e.g., Latin) and logographic (chinese) writing systems.
See this page:
http://www.omniglot.com/writing/definition.htm
or the book "The world's Writing Systems", by Daniels and Bright.
10 Oct 2007 — 1:44pm
I don't think a lack of ascenders/descenders has anything to do with the success of a writing system. The latin alphabet started out as all majuscules and lived through textura, seems to be doing OK.
Carolingian miniscules may have given it a kick in the pants but mostly that was just to expedite handwriting.
10 Oct 2007 — 3:34pm
>He told me that the lack of ascenders and descenders alone is enough to damn any writing system to failure.
LOL! But writing systems like Elvish are roaring successes ;-)
10 Oct 2007 — 6:38pm
Elvish (Tolkien's Tengwar) has ascenders and descenders.