On Tue, 03 May 2005 15:18:37 -0400, suzmccarth <suzmccarth@...>
wrote:

> So I concede that I am in the minority in putting as much emphasis on
> the 'surface phenomenon' as I do. It doesn't mean that I am not aware of
> the formal aspects but I have a different perspective.

Indeed; such a difference seems to extend to many fields. In mechanical
and electrical engineering, one gains a very valuable outlook, and a
certain kind of understanding, from "hands-on" experience when young.
(With luck, one doesn't need to unlearn too much.) Study of writing
systems, I'd guess, would amount partly to learning to write (or set type)
in many scripts[1], and maybe design new ones, but "hands-on" doesn't seem
to have any close parallel --- or, does it?

There's a place for both very intellectual, relatively abstract study and
exposition, as well as "real world" practical experience. One would hope
to witness a mutual respect among people who are mostly oriented one way
or the other.

[1] Yrs trly knows very well the difficulty of trying to copy, say,
hiragana, so it looks good, or an elaborate CJK glyph, keeping the
proportions decent. I like to copy bits and pieces of various characters
to a personal, archival wire-bound notebook, and lack of experience in any
given script creates a real challenge to one's artistic ability! I still
need to be careful with nothing more than a Cyrillic D...

My interest is not so passionate as to practice calligraphy, and
particularly what might be cotnsidered a special branch of that art, which
enables one to skillfully write a few characters from almost any script,
so they look good. (Does anyone, anywhere, teach such a thing? That is,
special calligraphic exercises to better prepare one to write in almost
any script? Would good training in artistic freehand drawing be
sufficient?)

Regards,

--
Nicholas Bodley /*|*\ Waltham, Mass. (Not "MA")
The curious hermit -- autodidact and polymath
who can make decent technical sketches
Still hoping to read Snow on The Two Cultures...