Hi Everyone,

I need your help in the form of a short consultation. I would like to use my font as an example for the continuity of Kanji/Hanzi and the Latin script. You need to select the right signs and mark the ones that failed.

Thank you!

It seems an interesting exercise. Unfortunately, I’m not familiar enough with CJK characters to give an informed opinion.

That said, it is sometimes interesting seeing the novel approach to Latin letters from, for example, Japanese type designers.

Also, it could be useful explaining a bit more the motivation and reasoning behind the experiment.

My goal is to expand the character composition of the previously made font.

I have done some research on my own, but at the moment I need advice. Two three comments on the hieroglyphics I made will allow me to continue working on the font.

Here are a couple of comments from Twitter:

Aaron Bell:

Quote

to my eye, the Kana characters have much more fluidity and energy than the Latin ones do—none feel particularly matching to me. The Latin, while brush inspired, is actually quite controlled and careful. The Kana is more carefree.

Simon Cozens:

Quote

Would really help to see them in use together.

 

As for my personal comment, first of all I’m glad I was right thinking that the glyphs are kana and not kanji.

Then, I think I understand the reasoning behind the construction of characters like A1, C2, etc., that is to introduce a structure similar to that of |t|, where a brush stroke interacts with a more technical horizontal line.

While I find it graphically interesting, I can’t know if it could work for a reader of the language.

If I understand Kana correctly, it can be represented as a modular system. 

Which of the kana characters is the most appropriate for the Latin alphabet?