glyphs home
GD22

Glyphs of the GD22 type seldom appear alone and 'clear' from other signs. In Tahua there are only these two glyphs (Aa5-22 and Ab6-3):

Even so we immediately notice the assymmetric 'moon ears'. That the glyphs have different heights is due to Ab6-3 having been intentionally drawn short, which can be seen from the surrounding glyphs, its low height is a sign.

Both glyphs have the 'moon crescent' (as if seen behind a mushroom) distorted, the left 'moon ear' is thicker than the right one and also located lower down. Furthermore, in Ab6-3 the right side of the 'mushroom' is drawn lower than the left.

Neither of these two glyphs are consequently free from additional signs. The 'foot' of GD22 glyphs often shows a sign ín form of left-right assymmetry as in e.g. Aa8-1:

The 'mushroom' in Aa8-1 is drawn with straight lines, a feature which is not unusual but anyhow must be regarded as yet another sign. We can see this sign also in e.g. Aa1-4 and Ab3-73:

One or both of the 'moon ears' may be missing, as in Aa7-20, Aa2-31 and Ab2-64:

The 'foot' can be 'swollen' (Aa2-4, Ab7-66 and Ab2-9):

The 'mushroom' can have 'feathers', for instance as in Ab5-2 and Aa6-51:

These 'feathers' may be a sign of GD19. Cfr Aa4-58 and Aa4-60 which I have decided to categorize as examples of GD19 (because of their central 'holes'):

On the other hand they also belong to the curious GD81.

The 'foot' may look like a fish tail, Aa8-27 and Aa8-78:

Or the 'foot' can have 'eyes', Aa4-30 and Ab7-43:

Or the 'foot may instead have 'moon ears', as for instance in Aa6-29. This feature is possibly due to an influence from GD17, which is suggested in Ab8-21:

Special cases are Aa2-6 and Aa2-41:

Although we can recognize GD83 in these two glyphs we can also imagine allusions to GD22.

Another special case is Aa7-85:

In spite of its strange appearance we should probably understand that GD22 is expressed. We can see the 'moon crescent' and we can see the two 'eyes' which sometimes are found at the 'foot' of GD22 glyphs (see above). Furthermore, immediately following Aa7-85 we find a clearcut case of GD22, viz. Aa8-1:

There remains only one more questionable glyph to present, Ab8-2:

Undoubtedly this glyph should primarily be classified as GD63, but the shape of its bent 'head' may allude to GD22.

 

Aruku Kurenga (B)

Curious is Bb10-42:

Mamari (C)

Cb13-6, Cb13-9 and Cb13-11 look different from the other GD22 glyphs:

     

Though unquestioanbly they belong to GD22.

 

Échancrée (D)

Db1-106 has been classified as GD22 (in addition to GD74) because of the sign hanging down from the thumb:

 

Keiti (E)

Likewise, in Ea1-16 we have a sign (bottom right) which can be interpreted as GD22:

At the center of Ea6-30 there is a sign in form of an inverted GD22:

 

Eb4-2 and Eb5-10 may be constructions meriting a special GD, but in lack of that they must belong to GD22:

  

 

The rest of the texts

The texts above have been used as a kind of 'test ground' to see if the definitions could be used.

For the rest of the texts the same principles have been used, although less stringently. The experiences gained have been relied upon rather than what is written above about what characterizes the glyph type.

There may be a few extra glyph added, which would not have been so with a strict application of the written definitions. On the other hand there has been no attempt to ignore glyphs which according to the written definitions ought to belong to the glyph type.