glyphs home
GD27

This fish type has head up and a straight tail, not bent as in GD62:

Fins are seen on one or both sides, whereas the fishes in GD38 have no fins on their sides:

There are few glyphs of this type in Tahua. One example we may point at is Aa6-67:

Though obviously the creator has thought of two parts: the upper in the shape of a kind of cross and the lower  where a fish possibly is being swallowed.

In Aa1-61 there is a sign (right) which has the characteristics of GD27:

But to see this is not easy. There is only one 'fin' (at the right side) and the head is probably drawn to allude to some other type of glyph. The tail is only hinted at.

There are two more examples (Ab3-35 and Ab3-37) with only one side 'fin' (though located on the opposite side):

  

The tails are tiny. Ab3-35 and Ab3-37 can be used as stepping stones to dare identify the right part of Aa1-61 (above) as GD27. Aa1-68, just a few glyphs away from Aa1-61, also strengthens the case for identifying the right part of Aa1-61 as GD27:

Here we cannot see an open mouth. But that is no problem - glyphs may be assigned to GD27 even if the mouth is closed. Clearly there are side fins in Aa1-68 and clearly we see a kind of fish, Aa1-68 must belong to GD27. Perhaps the head of Aa1-68 has no open mouth because the top part is a sign of another type of glyph, for example GD28:

GD27 may have fins converted into arms and legs, e.g. as in Ab2-50:

Or fins may be converted into other members (Ab2-63 and Aa7-29):

 

Aruku Kurenga (B)

Bb4-34--35 possibly are free from other signs (than the 'feather string' in Bb4-34):

  

Ba10-2 and Bb2-13, on the other hand, have various signs on them:

  

Even more clearly are Ba6-3 and Bb2-1 'infested' by signs:

  

Ba4-12 is fundamentally a variant of GD65, but it looks as if an allusion is made to GD27:

 

Mamari (C)

No GD27 signs.

 

Échancrée (D)

The peculiar mouths of Da7-107 and Da7-113 maybe indicates that Db3-108 alludes to GD27:

     

 

Keiti (E)

Ea1-4 has a shape somewhat resembling Ab3-35:

  

Ea1-17 has a 'mouth':

 

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.