Consider a fictional species of sapient creatures descended from arthropods that greatly resembled Hymenopterans and termites in both their physical biology and behavior. Their social lifestyle varies on an individual basis between nomadic (solitary or in small packs) and colonial (large eusocial communities of usually related individuals, headed by one or more breeding mothers). Technologically, they're still at the "Stone Age" level, with wood and stone being the primary materials for tool-making and no form of metalworking whatsoever.
- Would it be plausible for such a species to have developed a written form of their spoken language, which in its current form is an intricate logophonetic script comprising both ideograms and a phonetic alphabet/syllabary?
- What would be more plausible for the aforementioned language's origins: A logographic system were each symbol represented an idea and formed an entire word in its own right? Or an alphabet/syllabary that phonetically represented individual speech sounds, with the meanings inferred from both the combination of those sounds and the context they're placed in? Or are both approaches equally plausible? If there are pros and cons for each, I'd appreciate an explanation of them.