<h2>I don't think there's already a word for this exact subset of scripts.</h2>

<p>However, I think such a term would be a useful one -- we certainly have to refer to these sorts of scripts in the conlanging community -- and I think there are a number of options here.</p>

<h2>1. Circumlocution</h2>

<p>We could refer to these sorts of scripts in paraphrastic ways, like how you have in your question. "Transliteration alphabet" and "substitution cipher" both work for this purpose. However, I don't think this is a particularly attractive option, as these are long and rather unwieldy. Shortenings of these phrases end up being pretty ambiguous, as well. "Transliteration" in particular is usually used to describe completely separate things entirely, so using it in isolation to refer to these scripts would be confusing at best, and "substitution" is too vague.</p>

<h2>2. Neologism</h2>

<p>Since these sorts of scripts are really the neographic equivalent of relexes, we could also coin a new term like "relex" to refer to these scripts. Just spitballing, here are a few examples of the sorts of coinages that could work:</p>

<ul>
<li>transbet (from "transliteration alphabet")</li>
<li>subscript (from "substitution script" -- though this word does obviously already have another meaning so that might not be desirable)</li>
<li>rescript (from analogy with "relex")</li>
<li>keychain script (because these sorts of scripts are easily used to sell keychains with people's names on them 'in another language')</li>
</ul>

<p>There are any number of ways that such a term could be derived beyond these, but I feel that in order to have a term that describes this subset of scripts, <em>some</em> sort of new coinage is necessary.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-13T01:05:20.987Z
Maybe something like faux conlang would work, focusing more on the language side of it than the writing. But that could also describe gibberish "conlangs" too.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-13T02:37:52.773Z
Okay, so much for two possible methods of coining a phrase; but how does this answer the OP's question? To these, I'd add "organic consensus" (i.e., how we got saddled with "conscript" and "conlang" in the first place!) and "geniusly spontaneous insight", which is simply were someone who feels the need to Name something just comes up with a name.
elemtilas
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-02-18T07:17:23.950Z
If I ever finish my conlang, I'll make sure there are words for these in my lexicon ;)
Domino
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T21:56:48.703Z
2018-04-12T21:56:48.703Z
Sparksbet
<p>I would call this a <strong>cipher</strong>. <a href="https://www.dictionary.com/browse/cipher" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dictionary.com</a>'s 6th entry for &quot;cipher&quot; reads, in part:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>a secret method of writing, as by transposition or substitution of letters, specially formed symbols, or the like.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This gives us two requirements for being a cipher:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Secrecy</strong></li>
<li><strong>Substitution</strong></li>
</ul>
<p>Since this sort of script is ostensibly used to write a constructed language while actually just transcribing English (or another natlang), the requirement for secrecy is satisfied. As the conscript comprises symbols that stand in for Latin (or other natural script) letters or symbols, the requirement for substitution is satisfied.</p>
<p>Let's look at the examples of scripts you want to exclude:</p>
<ul>
<li>Deseret: This is explicitly for the purpose of writing English and is widely published for such purpose and thus it fails the requirement of secrecy.</li>
<li>Tengwar: Tengwar are not primarily used to replace otherwise extant letters or symbols and thus fails the requirement of substitution</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-02T23:23:53.870Z
I think it would be pretty natural to call the dancing men a cipher though.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-03T03:16:30.273Z
@curiousdannii Yes, under the traditional meaning of a term. But it's not uncommon for specific fields to have particular meanings that are narrower, broader, or different. Ask a botanist, for example, whether a tomato or strawberry is a fruit (a tomato is, a strawberry isn't), or a linguist whether "It is raining" contains an expletive (it does). Yet ask a lay person, and you'll get different answers. Thus a conlanger's definition of "cipher" needn't match a cryptographer's.
OpenAI was the last straw
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-03T03:33:42.413Z
Are other conlangers actively using "cipher" with this meaning, or are you just suggesting it?
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-03T03:35:38.990Z
@curiousdannii I can't say what word others would use. This would be my pick. As elemtilas said, the best solution would be organic consensus, but that doesn't seem to have happened here.
OpenAI was the last straw
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-02T15:58:54.980Z
2020-07-02T15:58:54.980Z
OpenAI was the last straw
<p>Many constructed writing systems are purportedly used to write conlangs, but in reality are actually used to write English or another natlang.</p>

<p>For example, <a href="http://www.omniglot.com/writing/kryptonian.php" rel="noreferrer">omniglot.com says that Kryptonian</a> is "a transliteration alphabet containing symbols for each of the letters of the English alphabet. ... They just used this alphabet to write things in English in the comics."</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/w1iM8.gif" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/w1iM8.gif" alt="The Kryptonian alphabet"></a></p>

<p><a href="http://bionicle.wikia.com/wiki/Matoran_Language" rel="noreferrer">Matoran has been called</a> "similar to the English alphabet, being a simple substitution cipher".</p>

<p>And in Star Wars, <a href="http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Aurebesh" rel="noreferrer">Aurebesh</a> is essentially the same, a different way of writing English, although technically it's actually "Galactic Basic". Apparently another script was also used to write Galatic Basic, called <a href="http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Outer_Rim_Basic" rel="noreferrer">Outer Rim Basic</a>, although there's very little information about it.</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/VJaSk.png" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/VJaSk.png" alt="The Aurebesh alphabet"></a></p>

<p>I'd consider these example to be a different kind of thing compared to something like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adventure_of_the_Dancing_Men" rel="noreferrer">the dancing men script from Sherlock Holmes</a> as they're ostensibly constructed writing systems for other languages, whereas the dancing men script is explicitly another way of writing English.</p>

<p>In the conlang community, is there a specific term for this type of constructed writing system? Or should we just refer to them as "transliterations" or "substitutions"?</p>

<p>Please note that I am specifically asking if there is a term which excludes these categories:</p>

<ul>
<li>new orthographies for natlangs (ex. Canadian Aboriginal syllabics or Deseret for English)</li>
<li>a new writing system actually used to write a conlang (ex. Tengwar for Quenya)</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-10T17:35:39.670Z
[Omniglot](https://omniglot.com) has a lot of these; Simon calls them "con-scripts". Whether that's in any way a "recognized" or "official" term, I don't know, which is why this is a comment rather than an answer. I do think that if someone were to propose that this stack use that term 'formally', I'd support it. For writing one language in a script designed for another (e.g., writing English with tengwar or cyrillic), he also uses the term "adapted scripts".
Jeff Zeitlin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-10T23:32:41.313Z
@Jeff I thought "conscript" was used for any constructed writing system.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-11T07:45:45.103Z
@curiousdannii "Conscript" is indeed used for any constructed writing system, in my experience. I'm actually not aware of a term for these, which is vexing, since I've had times when a term specifically for these would be useful. "Substitution cipher" is the most specific/accurate existing terminology that I've found so far ("transliteration" having a much broader meaning than just this), but it has the problem that it doesn't really convey that these are purported to be 'other languages.'
Sparksbet
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-11T11:21:47.677Z
OK, it wasn't actually clear that you were interested specifically in scripts used to purport to be other languages, but which are actually simple substitution cyphers - in other words, you're distinguishing between these and the 'dancing men' on the basis of "self-story", rather than actual usage. Yes, 'con-script' is a more general term, applicable to both these and scripts devised specifically to write conlangs.
Jeff Zeitlin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-11T11:23:55.827Z
Incidentally, I tend to prefer to hyphenate 'con-script' in the meaning appropriate to this stack, and leave the unhyphenated 'conscript' to mean (roughly) 'someone who has been forced into [usually military] service' or the equivalent verb, 'force a person into [usually military] service'.
Jeff Zeitlin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-11T16:39:41.597Z
The word you're looking for here is **neography**. Etymologically, "new writing". This works for both natural languages (like English, which has at least one neography) as well as invented languages where someone has created a script for the language. Neography has the happy position of being not only a "real" word already in use, but far more aesthetically pleasing than "conscript". All the con- words (in my opinion) are ugly and, while I get the rationale (and was around for a couple of them's invention) I share the opinion of many that the neologism was an unhappy one that we're now stuck w
elemtilas
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-11T23:13:13.933Z
It sounds like something that would be used for writing a conlang though, like pIqaD for Klingon.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T00:53:21.750Z
Piqad is indeed a neography --- an invented script for an invented language in this case.
elemtilas
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T01:09:38.887Z
I am specifically asking about invented scripts purportedly used for conlangs but actually used for natlangs. None of pIqaD, Inuktitut, Deseret or Queranarran fit what I asked for.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T01:19:13.967Z
Then I think you might need to rewrite your question! You asked *Is there a specific term for a constructed writing system used to write natlangs?* Now you want to change your question by adding exclusions and so forth. I think the answer now is going to be **NO**.
elemtilas
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T01:24:50.450Z
I thought it was clear enough to start with given the examples I gave (I don't see how anyone would have misunderstood unless they only read the title), but I have indeed revised it now.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T02:02:37.253Z
Well, I've read and reread your question, and I really don't think I'm misunderstanding anything. I'd still say the answer is "neography"! Doesn't really matter what purpose you put it to! You could certainly write English using Tengwar or Piqad or even Queranarran script!
elemtilas
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T02:19:13.843Z
I'm asking for a term for the subcategory of neographies used purported but not actually for conlangs. Just as conlang is a subcategory of language and artlang is a subcategory of conlang, of course you can refer to all of these scripts as neographies just like you can refer to Quenya as a language. But that doesn't make "neography" a term for a subcategory of itself.
curiousdannii
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T21:58:02.943Z
@JeffZeitlin Instances in which those meanings could not be distinguished based on context alone seem like they would be incredibly rare.
Sparksbet
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-12T23:17:31.663Z
Let us [continue this discussion in chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/75948/discussion-between-elemtilas-and-curiousdannii).
elemtilas
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-13T11:46:54.810Z
@Sparksbet - Perhaps; I'll concede that it's a personal bias. I also prefer to explicitly include diacritics when I'm writing e.g., _résumé_ (the document submitted for employment) vs. _resume_ (continue a process after a pause).
Jeff Zeitlin
<writing-systems><terminology>
Is there a specific term for a constructed writing system purportedly used for a conlang but actually for a natlang?
# Is there a specific term for a constructed writing system purportedly used for a conlang but actually for a natlang?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-04-10)

Many constructed writing systems are purportedly used to write conlangs, but in reality are actually used to write English or another natlang.

For example, [omniglot.com says that Kryptonian](http://www.omniglot.com/writing/kryptonian.php) is "a transliteration alphabet containing symbols for each of the letters of the English alphabet. ... They just used this alphabet to write things in English in the comics."

[![The Kryptonian alphabet](https://i.sstatic.net/w1iM8.gif)](https://i.sstatic.net/w1iM8.gif)

[Matoran has been called](http://bionicle.wikia.com/wiki/Matoran_Language) "similar to the English alphabet, being a simple substitution cipher".

And in Star Wars, [Aurebesh](http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Aurebesh) is essentially the same, a different way of writing English, although technically it's actually "Galactic Basic". Apparently another script was also used to write Galatic Basic, called [Outer Rim Basic](http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Outer_Rim_Basic), although there's very little information about it.

[![The Aurebesh alphabet](https://i.sstatic.net/VJaSk.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/VJaSk.png)

I'd consider these example to be a different kind of thing compared to something like [the dancing men script from Sherlock Holmes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adventure_of_the_Dancing_Men) as they're ostensibly constructed writing systems for other languages, whereas the dancing men script is explicitly another way of writing English.

In the conlang community, is there a specific term for this type of constructed writing system? Or should we just refer to them as "transliterations" or "substitutions"?

Please note that I am specifically asking if there is a term which excludes these categories:

* new orthographies for natlangs (ex. Canadian Aboriginal syllabics or Deseret for English)
* a new writing system actually used to write a conlang (ex. Tengwar for Quenya)

**Tags:** writing-systems, terminology
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: [Omniglot](https://omniglot.com) has a lot of these; Simon calls them "con-scripts". Whether that's in any way a "recognized" or "official" term, I don't know, which is why this is a comment rather than an answer. I do think that if someone were to propose that this stack use that term 'formally', I'd support it. For writing one language in a script designed for another (e.g., writing English with tengwar or cyrillic), he also uses the term "adapted scripts".  
> **username_0**: @Jeff I thought "conscript" was used for any constructed writing system.  
> **username_2**: @curiousdannii "Conscript" is indeed used for any constructed writing system, in my experience. I'm actually not aware of a term for these, which is vexing, since I've had times when a term specifically for these would be useful. "Substitution cipher" is the most specific/accurate existing terminology that I've found so far ("transliteration" having a much broader meaning than just this), but it has the problem that it doesn't really convey that these are purported to be 'other languages.'  
> **username_1**: OK, it wasn't actually clear that you were interested specifically in scripts used to purport to be other languages, but which are actually simple substitution cyphers - in other words, you're distinguishing between these and the 'dancing men' on the basis of "self-story", rather than actual usage. Yes, 'con-script' is a more general term, applicable to both these and scripts devised specifically to write conlangs.  
> **username_1**: Incidentally, I tend to prefer to hyphenate 'con-script' in the meaning appropriate to this stack, and leave the unhyphenated 'conscript' to mean (roughly) 'someone who has been forced into [usually military] service' or the equivalent verb, 'force a person into [usually military] service'.  
> **username_3**: The word you're looking for here is **neography**. Etymologically, "new writing". This works for both natural languages (like English, which has at least one neography) as well as invented languages where someone has created a script for the language. Neography has the happy position of being not only a "real" word already in use, but far more aesthetically pleasing than "conscript". All the con- words (in my opinion) are ugly and, while I get the rationale (and was around for a couple of them's invention) I share the opinion of many that the neologism was an unhappy one that we're now stuck w  
> **username_0**: It sounds like something that would be used for writing a conlang though, like pIqaD for Klingon.  
> **username_3**: Piqad is indeed a neography --- an invented script for an invented language in this case.  
> **username_0**: I am specifically asking about invented scripts purportedly used for conlangs but actually used for natlangs. None of pIqaD, Inuktitut, Deseret or Queranarran fit what I asked for.  
> **username_3**: Then I think you might need to rewrite your question! You asked *Is there a specific term for a constructed writing system used to write natlangs?* Now you want to change your question by adding exclusions and so forth. I think the answer now is going to be **NO**.  
> **username_0**: I thought it was clear enough to start with given the examples I gave (I don't see how anyone would have misunderstood unless they only read the title), but I have indeed revised it now.  
> **username_3**: Well, I've read and reread your question, and I really don't think I'm misunderstanding anything. I'd still say the answer is "neography"! Doesn't really matter what purpose you put it to! You could certainly write English using Tengwar or Piqad or even Queranarran script!  
> **username_0**: I'm asking for a term for the subcategory of neographies used purported but not actually for conlangs. Just as conlang is a subcategory of language and artlang is a subcategory of conlang, of course you can refer to all of these scripts as neographies just like you can refer to Quenya as a language. But that doesn't make "neography" a term for a subcategory of itself.  
> **username_2**: @JeffZeitlin Instances in which those meanings could not be distinguished based on context alone seem like they would be incredibly rare.  
> **username_3**: Let us [continue this discussion in chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/75948/discussion-between-elemtilas-and-curiousdannii).  
> **username_1**: @Sparksbet - Perhaps; I'll concede that it's a personal bias. I also prefer to explicitly include diacritics when I'm writing e.g., _résumé_ (the document submitted for employment) vs. _resume_ (continue a process after a pause).  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2018-04-12. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

## I don't think there's already a word for this exact subset of scripts.

However, I think such a term would be a useful one -- we certainly have to refer to these sorts of scripts in the conlanging community -- and I think there are a number of options here.

## 1. Circumlocution

We could refer to these sorts of scripts in paraphrastic ways, like how you have in your question. "Transliteration alphabet" and "substitution cipher" both work for this purpose. However, I don't think this is a particularly attractive option, as these are long and rather unwieldy. Shortenings of these phrases end up being pretty ambiguous, as well. "Transliteration" in particular is usually used to describe completely separate things entirely, so using it in isolation to refer to these scripts would be confusing at best, and "substitution" is too vague.

## 2. Neologism

Since these sorts of scripts are really the neographic equivalent of relexes, we could also coin a new term like "relex" to refer to these scripts. Just spitballing, here are a few examples of the sorts of coinages that could work:

* transbet (from "transliteration alphabet")
* subscript (from "substitution script" -- though this word does obviously already have another meaning so that might not be desirable)
* rescript (from analogy with "relex")
* keychain script (because these sorts of scripts are easily used to sell keychains with people's names on them 'in another language')

There are any number of ways that such a term could be derived beyond these, but I feel that in order to have a term that describes this subset of scripts, *some* sort of new coinage is necessary.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Maybe something like faux conlang would work, focusing more on the language side of it than the writing. But that could also describe gibberish "conlangs" too.  
> **username_3**: Okay, so much for two possible methods of coining a phrase; but how does this answer the OP's question? To these, I'd add "organic consensus" (i.e., how we got saddled with "conscript" and "conlang" in the first place!) and "geniusly spontaneous insight", which is simply were someone who feels the need to Name something just comes up with a name.  
> **username_4**: If I ever finish my conlang, I'll make sure there are words for these in my lexicon ;)  

---

### Answer by username_5 on 2020-07-02. Score: 1

I would call this a **cipher**. [Dictionary.com](https://www.dictionary.com/browse/cipher)'s 6th entry for "cipher" reads, in part:

> a secret method of writing, as by transposition or substitution of letters, specially formed symbols, or the like.

This gives us two requirements for being a cipher:

* **Secrecy**
* **Substitution**

Since this sort of script is ostensibly used to write a constructed language while actually just transcribing English (or another natlang), the requirement for secrecy is satisfied. As the conscript comprises symbols that stand in for Latin (or other natural script) letters or symbols, the requirement for substitution is satisfied.

Let's look at the examples of scripts you want to exclude:

* Deseret: This is explicitly for the purpose of writing English and is widely published for such purpose and thus it fails the requirement of secrecy.
* Tengwar: Tengwar are not primarily used to replace otherwise extant letters or symbols and thus fails the requirement of substitution

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I think it would be pretty natural to call the dancing men a cipher though.  
> **username_5**: @curiousdannii Yes, under the traditional meaning of a term. But it's not uncommon for specific fields to have particular meanings that are narrower, broader, or different. Ask a botanist, for example, whether a tomato or strawberry is a fruit (a tomato is, a strawberry isn't), or a linguist whether "It is raining" contains an expletive (it does). Yet ask a lay person, and you'll get different answers. Thus a conlanger's definition of "cipher" needn't match a cryptographer's.  
> **username_0**: Are other conlangers actively using "cipher" with this meaning, or are you just suggesting it?  
> **username_5**: @curiousdannii I can't say what word others would use. This would be my pick. As elemtilas said, the best solution would be organic consensus, but that doesn't seem to have happened here.  

---

