Rcrrng Chrctrs

[Andrew Dinn]

Mikko Keskinen writes:

> Cn w ndrstad ths sntnc?  If we can, there are too _many_ characters in 
> normal phonetic alphabet. The English language written without vowels is 
> still intelligible. Th nglsh lngd cld b wrttn lmst wtht vwls, but the 
                                  ^
Uh, I think you meant `The nglsh lngg' (or maybe even `The Nglsh
lngg'?)

> consonantal system is supplemented by the - as such unnecessary, 
> excessive - vowels.  More than the consonants is, more or less, _more_ 
> than necessary, that is, overdetermined or overabundant with regard to 
> signification.

That said, I think I prefer to luxuriate in the present `redundancy'.
Your reductionism, Einstein-like as it may be, appears - to paraphrase
the great man - simpler than possible (actually it reminds me
worryingly of the Koop).


Andrew Dinn
-----------
Daran, nachdem die Wasserwogen / Von unsrer Suendflut sich verzogen
Der allerschoenste Regenbogen / Als Gottes Gnadenzeichen steht!