What does this research mean for the field?

Current writing-system typology is inadequate for classifying systems like Sutton SignWriting that encode articulatory-spatial-kinetic form, exposing a structural gap in the field's established categories. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.METHODOLOGICAL. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.CHALLENGES_CONSENSUS.

What question did this study set out to answer?

This paper investigates how to classify writing systems that inscribe articulatory-spatial-kinetic forms.

May 20, 2026Open Access

Kinematography and the Limits of Writing-System Typology

Key Points

This paper investigates how to classify writing systems that inscribe articulatory-spatial-kinetic forms.
Proposes kinematography as a term for such writing systems.
Evaluates the current limitations of writing-system typology in accommodating new forms.
Suggests that the need for new terminology indicates gaps in existing classification systems.
Identifies the limitations of current writing-system typology to encompass kinematographic writing.
Proposes that kinematography might be necessary to describe SignWriting effectively.

Abstract

This working paper is the typological capstone of Writing and Representation in Sutton SignWriting. It asks what writing-system typology should call a system that writes articulatory-spatial-kinetic form. The paper proposes kinematography as a candidate term for writing whose primary representational work is the durable inscription of articulatory-spatial-kinetic form. The term is offered as a pressure test, not as settled field terminology. The paper argues that if such a term becomes necessary to describe what SignWriting is doing structurally, the problem may be that current writing-system typology lacks a stable place for a real kind of writing.

Kinematography and the Limits of Writing-System Typology

Key Points

Abstract

Cite This Study