|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:46 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:47 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:49 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:49 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:51 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:51 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:51 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:52 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:53 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:55 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:57 pm
|
|
|
|
silentbobx ^is sooooooooooooooooooooooooo conefoosed what if I universally change the x so that it is an UPSIDEDOWN X and it makes the sound FSHJUGH an upside down X even though flipped to represent a differentiating axis, will still resemble the basic character of X, and if the sound were to be different, there would have to be some type of connotation or alteration to the letter so that the base of the English language will not be confused, perhaps X`, then if it made the sould FSHJUGH, the SH is a conjuctive sound exhibiting properties of both S and H, therefore due to the alteration of X to the new letter X`, there would be an exception due to it not being the true X as valued in the original description, furthermore, upon altering the x you must also alter the S so that the algebraic equality of the alphanumerical system shall stay stabalized, making the new letter S`, which sounds like BPLUSH, thus still making the SH conjuctive sound, binding the new X` to the even newer, S`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 1:58 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 2:01 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 2:04 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 2:08 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|