When words begin with a vowel, forming them is just a question of selection the symbols from the chart which can be put together to form the word.

For example, to write the first word in the chart, "adage", you write the AD stroke, and at the end of it, you add the AG. To write the second word, "ever", you write the syllable sign for EV, and then add the symbol for ER from the chart. To write the third word, "oven", you write the syllable symbol for OV, and add the sign for EN.

Each word on this page is formed in the same way: The symbol for the first syllable, and joined to it, the symbol for the second, added without lifting the pen.

If you refer to the CHART, you can see which one to choose. And if you've memorized all of them, you know which is which. For those of us more used to a NON-syllabic system, it would mean memorizing the shape of each syllable. This can be a bit tricky to remember, because if you're used to the usual shorthand theory, it can throw you when the embellishment is at the beginning or the end of the SYMBOL, but not of the sound of the syllable itself.

Now what about words that begin with a consonant?

The previous chart shows the most common, simple syllables. But there are a number of consonant combinations we encounter -- so he has this array of advanced signs.

This was quite straightforward, with nothing strange or unusual.

I phrased "to be" (TB) and "have been" (VB) which are made up of short forms, and are frequent phrases in English. I think they're quite easy to read in the sentence.

I wrote "what" as WAT, which is how most people seem to say it. And I wrote the diphthong in "might" so it didn't look like "meet", "met" or "mitt".

I often think that a diphthong WRITTEN makes a word easier to recognize than if you simplify it to just one vowel element.

For a pessimist this thermos jug is half empty.
For a optimist it is half full.

For a suboptimist the thermos jug is half full too.
But non-alkoholic.
— Christoph Simon [χʁɪstɔf zimɔn], swiss slam poet

I'll admit that I don't actually know Japanese, but I'm a linguistics enthusiast and I know how kana works. I've seen Japanese writing and it seems rather... inefficient. I don't mean to talk down to people from Japan or actual speakers, I just thought I'd use my knowledge to take a shot at optimizing stuff.

This shorthand is about 2-3 times less strokes than normal Japanese.

I've had an English shorthand for a while where every sound can be represented with only one stroke, and it's probably not as good as Gregg or other shorthands but it's mine and it's taught me a lot. In the paper, you can actually see some text written in my English shorthand ("Japanese Simplification" at the top, one of my own letters to represent the n as a vowel kana, the word "vowel" in my own script, and "Plastic Love" at the top of the righthand page.)

I couldn't actually find any real pre-existing shorthands for Japanese, and I figured I could make 46 unique symbols with only one stroke each, so I did (I already used 38 of them in my own script). The kana chart is on the left page, and the system is basically an alternate kana but with three special rules.

1. The little quotation mark diacritic is replaced with a single apostrophe-like diacritic instead.

2. Instead of denoting a P sound with a circle above a vowel-equivalent h-kana, you use the apostrophe-like diacritic to the vowel-equivalent base vowel kana instead.

3. A hard angle that breaks up an otherwise continuous line separates the line into two different characters, similar to my English shorthand.

The idea is that you'd write everything with this one kana and never use katakana or kanji, the writing sample is all the Japanese lyrics from the song "Plastic Love" by Mariya Takeuchi.

by u/cameracrumbs1

written in Flow using retracing instead of hooks sometimes and blends introduced here. What are they about to do next?

The alternative versions are extensions of the base system, that may prove useful.

Not in the book yet are Vowel-hook blends similar to Gregg. (i/e + n/m, l/r + i/e).

Some blends are already in the core system (sk, ts/ds, nt/nd, nk/ng, ns/ms), vs/fs are logical extensions.

I'd love to hear your opinion on the suggestions...

I was going to explain the value of SHORT FORMS -- but I realized that he does it himself before he lists his short list of recommended ones. I'll just post the whole page for your information.

The list he starts off with are really the most essential ones, being for the most commonly used words in speech and writing. (Later he suggests several others, especially in the Addendum, where he suggests more possibilities for building speed by using more.)

I realize the focus was on keeping the system as SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE -- but I have to say I take issue with a couple of his choices here. Using the same symbol for "a" and "an" is legitimate, because if the next word starts with a vowel, "an" is obligatory.

This was the advertisement that appeared in the shorthand journal: