I came to tell you something. You have seen posts more than once or twice in which there were inscriptions made in Glinnar vertical writing (for example, at least https://marraidh.com/e-thalbhaeridh/). It looks aesthetically pleasing, and is perfect for recording modern clay and northern clay. But why then is romanica usually used instead of it now? And why is it so similar to the spellings of some other languages?

It all started, in fact, with typography. And it ended with him: not a single method invented by anyone could satisfy the needs of Glinnar vertical writing. Woodcuts were quite suitable for hieroglyphs, but not for the alphabet itself: there are too many curved and parallel features. Typesetting, which arose later, was not suitable for anything at all: there were too many hieroglyphs, and in words there was an incredible number of ligatures. And somewhere in the middle of the 15th - early 16th century, the transition to romance began.

First of all, they decided to translate the largest living language from the Glinnar group into it - Glinnarya (South Glinnar). And they used the most logical scientific approach for this: they looked at which of the Orean languages has a phonetics that is as similar as possible to Glynarya. It turned out to be Lorland (at that time - medium), and the Alves borrowed the alphabet from it, modifying it somewhat.

Of course, the Lorland spelling at that time was somewhat different from the modern one (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaelic_type), but later both the Lorlanders modernized theirs and the Glynarians modernized theirs. So to this day, these two are very similar to each other.

For the North Glinnar, they took the duat one a little later - and the history of modernization was the same as with the previous one. Finally, the Llaehian remained, and everything was not much more complicated with him either - they took the Botanian. And the then Botian spelling differed from the modern one only in one letter, so you yourself understand that there was no need to modernize there.

The post is already getting long, so I'm rounding it up. In the next post on this subject, I will try to briefly explain the similarities and main differences between all Glinnar spellings and their prototypes.

(for the queries “Llaehsky”, “Glinnarya” and “NorthGlinnarsky”, you can also find examples in our posts. Small, but still)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *