VMs: Re: How to write <ch> and <sh>...?

["GC" <gc-@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gee Nick,

I'm no EVA officionado, but I'd say that when you ask how to write <ch> or
<sh> in EVA, you've answered your own question.  Perhaps you might get a
wild hair and write <Ch> or <Sh>? you should also be able to write <ch> as
<Eh>, and hopefully the reverse is true, <ch> as <cE>.  As far as the <sh>,
you can play around with the EVA letter combinations all you want, and not
be able to represent 1/4 of the glyphs generically recorded as <sh>, so why
try?

> <ch>, you get different effects depending where you start on the
horizontal
> bar - this may even be the physical origin for the "tear-drop" plumes (if
> you start on the top right of the bar). Whether this is due to a lazy
> writer or a subtle ciphering system is another question completely. :-)
>

The tear-drop plumes are written in the left-upward, right-downward stroke,
and are physically related to the backward plume, not the standard plume.
IF I understand your own analysis correctly, I think we agree on the basic
structure.  You've probably also noticed that the "rainbow" plume (a loose
arc over the <ch>), is also drawn in both directions - in one direction it
is rather innocuous, but in the reversed direction rather careful.  On that
theme you may also have noticed that the "caret" (^) plume also has a very
rare reverse, also done carefully in that event.

GC




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nick Pelling" <nickpelling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 4:50 AM
Subject: VMs: How to write <ch> and <sh>...?


> Hi everyone,
>
> One thing I've never quite been completely certain about is how to write
> <ch> and <sh>.
>
> Many <ch> instances have a faint line running from the bottom of the left
> curve to the middle of the right curve, which makes me think that for
> those, the quill stroke typically started top right, ran left along the
> horizontal bar, down the left curve, picked up and moved low over the
paper
> back to the top right again, brought down, and finally curved down the
> right curve.
>
> However, other <ch> instances look as though the letter was started in the
> centre of the horizontal line, with the "pull-back" done to the centre of
> the horizontal bar - this gives a "dip" or "lull" in the ink darkness
> across the bar.
>
> Also, there seems to be no obvious clue in yet other <ch> instances how
> they were written at all, so this is far from a complete account. :-/
>
> Further, the <ch>s through many crossed gallows look to me as though the
> horizontal bar was drawn left to right (with the stroke terminating in the
> right curve), with the left curve then added as a second separate stroke
> (though I'm not sure about the order, though).
>
> Finally, my guess is that <sh> instances were typically drawn leftwards
> from the centre of the horizontal bar, then the left curve downwards, then
> the plume through the bar, then resumed along the horizontal bar going
> rightwards, then terminating with the final right curve downwards. As with
> <ch>, you get different effects depending where you start on the
horizontal
> bar - this may even be the physical origin for the "tear-drop" plumes (if
> you start on the top right of the bar). Whether this is due to a lazy
> writer or a subtle ciphering system is another question completely. :-)
>
> Anyway, may I ask if anyone has tried to understand and systematise the
> whole VMs alphabet in this sort of way? I'd be especially interested to
> hear if this has been used to look at the hoary old Hand 1 / Hand 2
debate,
> which we don't seem to talk about much these days... :-)
>
> Cheers, .....Nick Pelling.....
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list

______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list