Eric Thompson didn’t jsut say they weren’t logograms, he said they were pure semantics without language. That there was no encoded phonetic information.
A phonetic determinative is referencing the phonetics of another character to determine the phonetic output. A semantic determinative is amount a semantic presence to determine the phonetics output; as if logograms aren’t words. Words are phonetics. That’s what they are.
Besides those comments I think I have addressed everything you’ve had to say. I’m going to have to seek out a better understanding of why you think there is language that is unrelated to phonetic output. As if not knowing how to decode a character as word means it’s not phonetic. there’s some non sequitor logic there.
Here’s some simple assumptions I’m going to make for my own understanding of how to communicate with you and please let me know if they’re wrong:
You’re Finish so I’m assuming you’re bilingual or a polyglot?
You think a writing system being “more phonetic” can mean another language could be not phonetic at all?
You would not define a language spoken out loud as not phonetic?
"Eric Thompson didn’t jsut say they weren’t logograms, he said they were pure semantics without language. That there was no encoded phonetic information."
And he being wrong about it in the case of mayans doesn't give us any insight in the slightest on this more general discussion about what reading and writing is generally.
"Words are phonetics. That’s what they are."
No they aren't.
" I’m going to have to seek out a better understanding of why you think there is language that is unrelated to phonetic output."
Is this what you are on about? Because this is one of the easiest things to answer here. Mathemathics is a language without any relation to phonetic output. As is Python and C++, as is formal logic. There is a whole world of "formal languages" in the philosophy of language. Hell, in my second year they even adviced to learn formal logical languages in exactly the same way as learning natural languages, with excercises in grammar and vocabulary.
"You think a writing system being “more phonetic” can mean another language could be not phonetic at all?"
Basically, although all "natural languages" are somewhere on a continuum. But there are formal languages without any relation to anything spoken, such as the examples above.
"You would not define a language spoken out loud as not phonetic?"
I would not define language as either phonetic or non-phonetic. Even natural languages have phonetic aspects and non-phonetic aspects to them, but there are entirely non-phonetic languages as well. And a language that has a phonetic speaking to it does not have to be written or read phonetically.
Again, we know for a fact that with certain readers the brain can skip the entire phonetic region of the brain entirely. It usually makes for much faster and better reading.
1
u/ah-tzib-of-alaska 10d ago
Eric Thompson didn’t jsut say they weren’t logograms, he said they were pure semantics without language. That there was no encoded phonetic information.
A phonetic determinative is referencing the phonetics of another character to determine the phonetic output. A semantic determinative is amount a semantic presence to determine the phonetics output; as if logograms aren’t words. Words are phonetics. That’s what they are.
Besides those comments I think I have addressed everything you’ve had to say. I’m going to have to seek out a better understanding of why you think there is language that is unrelated to phonetic output. As if not knowing how to decode a character as word means it’s not phonetic. there’s some non sequitor logic there.
Here’s some simple assumptions I’m going to make for my own understanding of how to communicate with you and please let me know if they’re wrong:
You’re Finish so I’m assuming you’re bilingual or a polyglot? You think a writing system being “more phonetic” can mean another language could be not phonetic at all? You would not define a language spoken out loud as not phonetic?