The characteristic feature of GD59 glyphs is the oval at the centre of the body. The oval normally is not circular, rather it has the form of an egg or fruit, as in Aa5-24 and Ab5-5:
The long axis of the egg / fruit is not always vertical - clearly so in Aa3-35:
Aa5-24 and Ab5-5 (see above) have ovals where the top end is somewhat dislocated to the right. In Ab2-16 the oval has a hexagonal shape:
There is a hyperlink leading from GD59 to GD23, and the reason is that I have classified as GD23 e.g. these glyphs (Aa6-77, Aa8-25, Ab7-25, Ab7-53 and Ab8-62):
Aruku Kurenga (B) In Bb6-24 the individual has partially separated into two halves:
That design forced me to also consider Bb11-20 as an allusion to GD59:
Mamari (C) Cb8-7 is a glyph which extends horizontally, looking like a combination of GD59 with GD56:
From this it is just a short step to the curious Ca9-17:
Ca1-6 has pointed legs:
Échancrée (D) Da2-112 is a combination with GD22:
Keiti (E) Ea4-34 needed to be classified as GD59 because I had done so earlier with Bb11-20:
Ea8-28 has peg-like legs:
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. |
