GD56 has a 'sitting' person with spread out legs and is typically seen lifting up both arms, as in Ab3-11:
The hands may be more realistic, as in Aa7-64 (here with curiously one finger from the left hand as if transplanted as a toe onto the left foot):
Variants with one realistic hand and the other in Y-shape are found, for example Aa3-48:
The toes fairly often are missing and instead we can see what looks like hooks or fins, as in Ab8-50, Aa4-61, Aa4-9:
Sometimes both arms are not held high, perhaps just one or none, Aa2-26, Aa4-28, Aa8-75 and Ab1-37:
The essential characteristic of GD56 is the posture with spread out legs. A few odd glyphs exhibiting this characteristic has made me classify them as GD56, viz. Ab8-15, Ab8-26 and Aa6-7 (also classified as GD31 and GD85):
A hyperlink leads to GD87 where somewhat similar glyphs are assembled.
Aruku Kurenga (B) Ba8-21 has odd upwards pointing 'toes' and the same we can find on one of the legs in Ba10-6:
Bb11-41 has a strange straight line connecting the 'tip of the hand' with the 'toes':
Possibly this is an allusion to GD52 (because of the form defined by the arm and leg at right).
Mamari (C) In Cb4-22 one of the toes is prolonged into some kind of growth:
Ca12-8 has one of the legs with upwards pointing 'toes':
Curious are Cb12-7, Ca9-17 and Cb5-3:
Échancrée (D) Da1-117 and Db1-103 have upwards pointing 'toes' (cfr Ba8-21):
Keiti (E) Eb3-26 has the same characteristic:
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. |
