New CBB

I am almost certain this has been thought of or do exist so here I'll explain the phonetic writing system I came up with, anyone know of the real one if there is any? whats it called?

I am adding some history of how I imagen it went just to give life and justify things.

A syllabary is based on a syllable structure of CV in most if not all cases.
Abugidas are based on the same but the vowel can be supressed.

My idea uses the syllable structure of CVC as the base, the original language had a CVC structure and hence it became the base for it.

In this either consonant could be supressed by a diatric so it became either CV or VC for which ever purpose they needed. and they had a diatric to indicate which kind of vowel it was, the glyph itself only represented CC but the diatric told which vowel it was with the exception of the inherent expected vowel and because that would fit all syllables there was no need to supress the acctual vowel.

A later development was adding another dimension to the vowel diatric, this aroused as the language syllable went from CVC to CCVCC, The vowels location could be altered so it went from CVC to VCC or CCV, but also the option to leave it out entirely so it was simply CC.

This is the idea / fictional history I have for a script system of phonetical nature I came up with, thoughts?

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!

Having syllablic glyphs with diacritics determining the vowel is the basis of Devanagari script. It's not an exact match, but it shares some features.


Also, you used the word "diatric" a lot, which isn't a word; I think what you're trying to say is "diacritic". I would have thought this was a typo, but you used it repeatedly, so maybe you simply didn't know the correct spelling and/or pronunciation?

The primary difference between a syllabary and an abugida is that in a syllabary, the glyphs are primitive. You can't separate a 'consonant part' from a 'vowel part'. In an abugida, the glyphs are composed of a 'consonant part' (forming the main part or 'body' of the glyph) and a 'vowel part' (often some diacritic or minor modification of the vowel). There is nothing inherent in a syllabary that says you can't use syllabaries even for language with many complex syllables, though it would require a larger number of glyphs.

How are the glyphs built up in your language? How many possible CVC syllables are there, which would require separate glyphs?

_________________
constructedlanguages.net

Wrong spelling xD I am trying to fix it but the old one is stuck hard in my brain.

But I know it bear some resamblance to both but the double consonant nature makes me want to think of it as a new system :P


In its most basic form it would require 13*13=169 CVC glyphs, though I am probably doing it a bit more complex and might go as high as 20*20.

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!

But a CVC syllable contains three elements, not two.

_________________
constructedlanguages.net

If you read what I said earlier the vowel is treated in the same manner as it is for Abugidas so it carries no weight in the symbol design.

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!

Sorry, I don't read it carefully enough...

You have any samples of your script? (Or would you mind posting them when you have?)

_________________
constructedlanguages.net

I do not have one but I will be happy to once I have the acctual script ready! I am working on the many grapehemes, but does anyone have any idea of wether there is something liek this or if its new?

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!

Emperor Sejong's Hangeul.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hangul
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/254335/Hangul
http://langintro.com/kintro/toc.htm
http://www.omniglot.com/writing/korean.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvcKYW5ustw

_________________
I am not responsible for the accuracy of my sources; they're responsible for their own mistakes, if any, and also responsible for defending their own statements if you disagree with them.

Yeeaahh....no Hangul isn't even close in this structure. its Feautral this is not nadi t deals with single consonants, not dual.

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!

The best name I have found for it otehr than pulling one out of my ass is "Bi-Consonantal Abugida"

_________________
Visit the growing Conlang Wiki!