| |
|
Okay, here's the nitty gritty belated update. While I agree that it was used more in divination, my encounters and understanding is that, while far from mundane, it could at times double as a script. And, since it carries more or less specific definitions, though they're not neat concepts as I'm familiar with, (not as linear, and deal sometimes with the essence of several different objects, forces, or actions, rather than a specific of any of those), they do correlate to a definition.
There are many other examples of scripts dualing over into other uses, whether it was numerical, pictographic and phonetic, or, in this case, magickal. In fact, part of my problem, (and maybe someone could settle this), comes from a plethora of written and vocal opinions about the Futhorc and the Ogham. Some say that, at least in the Futhorc, the additional row was added to be phonetic, had no magickal correlation, etc., and was only present in order to pronounce foreign consonants and otherwise, conveniently belonging to their new rulers. Than there's the extreme opposite, (of course). While this is a quick illustration, I'm mentioning this because I'm going on the assumption that there's nothing indicating that the magick and language were mutually exclusive. So, I'm going to assume that they were intertwined, and not even going to being to wonder to what degree.
Now, I think this is the story, so there obviously must be some schooled in it. And I found an online dictionary, which is shit for actually being a reliable source, (though I'm not looking to be too academic), it is a chinese etymology dictionary. So, the input has to be in chinese characters, which means I need to translate an english word through something as reliable and infallible as, say, Babelfish, (although I retranslate{?} it once more into english to make sure it isn't something like 'fish taco dog boat', I'm still weary). Then I can paste it into some obscure etymology dictionary, online, wherein I can extrapolate a meaning from the character given, itself being vague and a few thousand years old.
But, what did I expect looking for even broad information on proto-languages? Let alone anything surviving the last of the wood based cultures?
So, here's the issue:
Apparently there is information, and it's scant online, sparse in libraries, the subject of study in china, (though there aren't many resources, even though it's hailed as a boon and treasure trove in academia), and it makes me mad. Do I expect anything to fall into my lap? Not really. I was just wondering if for some reason someone would know something. The main frustrating thing is that there are sparse correspondence tables...you have to search for each word to see if it's even there.
Bah...enough, updates to follow. |
|
|
