There are 19 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Vowels Control Your Brain
From: Lee
1b. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
From: Koppa Dasao
1c. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
From: Gary Shannon
1d. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
From: Padraic Brown
1e. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
From: Charlie Brickner
1f. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
From: Herman Miller
1g. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
From: Alex Fink
1h. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
From: Alex Fink
2a. Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: Koppa Dasao
2b. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: Sam Stutter
2c. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: Gary Shannon
2d. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: Koppa Dasao
2e. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: Koppa Dasao
2f. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: Padraic Brown
2g. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: Koppa Dasao
2h. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: Gary Shannon
2i. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: Padraic Brown
2j. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: R A Brown
3.1. Re: Genealogical classification of conlangs (was: Euroclones)
From: Padraic Brown
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Vowels Control Your Brain
Posted by: "Lee" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 9:22 am ((PST))
Vowels Control Your Brain
http://npr.tumblr.com/post/13925293239/vowels-control-your-brain-krulwich-wonders
We've all probably heard this before. Wondering what the counts of conlang
words for small, thin, light things vs big, solid, heavy things compares to
respective front/back vowel counts.
Lee
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
Posted by: "Koppa Dasao" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 3:48 pm ((PST))
In Delang that would be
small - min, big - bigg
thin - minz, thick - epah
Koppa Dasao
___
Зеҫаєлі весно!
Les Miserables forever!
2011/12/8 Lee <[email protected]>:
> Vowels Control Your Brain
> http://npr.tumblr.com/post/13925293239/vowels-control-your-brain-krulwich-wonders
>
> We've all probably heard this before. Wondering what the counts of conlang
> words for small, thin, light things vs big, solid, heavy things compares to
> respective front/back vowel counts.
>
>
> Lee
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 4:21 pm ((PST))
My biggest lexicon is from my 30-day conlang project last year, and
it's a pretty mixed bag. The back vowels are more common than the
front ones, and there seems to be no co relation between the vowels
and the attributes of thin/fat, wide/skinny, etc. I guess that means
this conlang is not very naturalistic. :)
--gary
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Koppa Dasao <[email protected]> wrote:
> In Delang that would be
> small - min, big - bigg
> thin - minz, thick - epah
>
>
> Koppa Dasao
> ___
> Зеҫаєлі весно!
> Les Miserables forever!
>
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
1d. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:17 pm ((PST))
Dunno. Frish and frosh sound about the same creaminess to me. I love
taking those kinds of tests, cos I always end up skewing their preconcieved
notions. First thing I thought when they said "ee" and "ih" tend to
describe small things was "yeah, *tree*, *ship*, *hill*, *scree field* --
yep, those are all wee tiny little things!"
Sounds to me like some social scientist has either too much time or too
much money on hand! (Ah, I see! *tOO mUch* -- yeah, that describes
something big!)
Padraic
--- On Thu, 12/8/11, Koppa Dasao <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Koppa Dasao <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [CONLANG] Vowels Control Your Brain
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Thursday, December 8, 2011, 6:48 PM
> In Delang that would be
> small - min, big - bigg
> thin - minz, thick - epah
>
>
> Koppa Dasao
> ___
> Зеҫаєлі весно!
> Les Miserables forever!
>
>
>
> 2011/12/8 Lee <[email protected]>:
> > Vowels Control Your Brain
> > http://npr.tumblr.com/post/13925293239/vowels-control-your-brain-krulwich-wonders
> >
> > We've all probably heard this before. Wondering what
> the counts of conlang words for small, thin, light things vs
> big, solid, heavy things compares to respective front/back
> vowel counts.
> >
> >
> > Lee
>
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
1e. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
Posted by: "Charlie Brickner" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:18 pm ((PST))
On Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:21:52 -0800, Lee <[email protected]>
wrote:
>We've all probably heard this before. Wondering what the counts of conlang
words for small, thin, light things vs big, solid, heavy things compares to
respective front/back vowel counts.
In Senjecas:
big = m�dzis
small = m�nwis
thin = n��mbis (skinny)
t�nwis (fine)
thick = t�gwis
light = �ris
heavy = gw�mhis
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
1f. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
Posted by: "Herman Miller" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 7:04 pm ((PST))
On 12/8/2011 12:21 PM, Lee wrote:
> Vowels Control Your Brain
> http://npr.tumblr.com/post/13925293239/vowels-control-your-brain-krulwich-wonders
>
> We've all probably heard this before. Wondering what the counts of conlang
> words for small, thin, light things vs big, solid, heavy things compares to
> respective front/back vowel counts.
>
>
> Lee
Many of my words for "little" or "small" have front vowels, and most of
those have /i/ (e.g. Jarda "diŗ", Kirezagi "ywi", Minza "riki", Tirelat
"tikŕi"). Words with low or back vowels are uncommon (e.g. Neesklaaz
"myaka").
The Jarda word for "big" is identical to the Olaetian word for "small"
("sed"). I just noticed that; I don't think the similarity was
deliberate. Many of the words for "big", though, have /a/ or /o/ (e.g.
Minza "taži", Tirelat "nogli". Similarly, words for "huge" also tend to
have low or back vowels (Jarda "ķas", Tirelat "pulği").
Counterexamples: the Zharranh word for "huge" is "šimi". The Minza word
for "tiny" is "tałi" (the -i is just the absolutive ending for
adjectives; the genitive of "tałi" would be "tała").
"Heavy" and "light" words don't fit the pattern as clearly, though.
"Heavy" words do tend to have at least one low or back vowel, but
"light" words don't have as many high front vowels. The Tirelat word
"muka" (light) even seems less of a lightweight word than "ğorbi" (heavy).
"Thick" and "thin" words follow the expected pattern more closely, with
the notable exception of "tłužu", the Tirelat word for "thin". Typical
"thick" words have /a/, /o/, or /u/ such as Jarda "pŗóx" or Tirelat
"gumi", while "thin" words have front vowels like Olaetian "seŕax" or
Zharranh "teĵaŧ".
But this is a sampling of only a few languages, so I don't know if it's
typical of my languages in general.
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
1g. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
Posted by: "Alex Fink" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 8:24 pm ((PST))
On Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:21:52 -0800, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>Vowels Control Your Brain
>http://npr.tumblr.com/post/13925293239/vowels-control-your-brain-krulwich-wonders
>
>We've all probably heard this before. Wondering what the counts of conlang
words for small, thin, light things vs big, solid, heavy things compares to
respective front/back vowel counts.
pjaukra will be the only one of my langs with lexis enough for this. These
are the pairs of dimension antonyms I could think to look for (all initially
stressed):
_daika_ 'large', _niSi_ 'small' (and _peltSi_ 'fine, very small')
_kaxra_ 'long', _tibi_ 'short'
_buru_ 'long (of time)', _auja_ 'short (of time)'
_guna_ 'thick (across)', _mresa_ 'thin (across)'
_tereiwe_ 'thick (around), fat', _sinere_ 'thin (around), skinny'
_gurdwa_ 'heavy', _milegja_ 'light'
_waltsa_ 'deep', _seru_ 'shallow'
_kaja_ 'high, tall', _lanja_ 'low, (?)short'
_latse_ 'far', _raGa_ 'near'
So the vowel symbolism holds good: if the last two aren't quite sizelike
enough to count, then we only have one front main V on the left and only one
back one on the right.
Alex
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
1h. Re: Vowels Control Your Brain
Posted by: "Alex Fink" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 8:39 pm ((PST))
On Thu, 8 Dec 2011 23:23:58 -0500, Alex Fink <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:21:52 -0800, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Vowels Control Your Brain
>>http://npr.tumblr.com/post/13925293239/vowels-control-your-brain-krulwich-wonders
>>
>>We've all probably heard this before. Wondering what the counts of conlang
>words for small, thin, light things vs big, solid, heavy things compares to
>respective front/back vowel counts.
>
>pjaukra will be the only one of my langs with lexis enough for this. These
>are the pairs of dimension antonyms I could think to look for (all initially
>stressed):
>_daika_ 'large', _niSi_ 'small' (and _peltSi_ 'fine, very small')
>_kaxra_ 'long', _tibi_ 'short'
>_buru_ 'long (of time)', _auja_ 'short (of time)'
>_guna_ 'thick (across)', _mresa_ 'thin (across)'
>_tereiwe_ 'thick (around), fat', _sinere_ 'thin (around), skinny'
>_gurdwa_ 'heavy', _milegja_ 'light'
>_waltsa_ 'deep', _seru_ 'shallow'
>_kaja_ 'high, tall', _lanja_ 'low, (?)short'
>_latse_ 'far', _raGa_ 'near'
>
>So the vowel symbolism holds good: if the last two aren't quite sizelike
>enough to count, then we only have one front main V on the left and only one
>back one on the right.
Huh, and looking at that list again, I notice also that there's a good
preponderance of initial stops on the left (the big side) and initial
continuants on the right (the small side)! Wonder where I got thàt tendency
from.
Alex
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "Koppa Dasao" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 4:06 pm ((PST))
It has been some interesting weeks for me, as most here has come to
know. But more has happened. I've got this image in my head that
doesn't go away. I'm sure most of you have seen it on TV, is some form
or another on CSI or other shows of the same genre. But still real
life is something else. So don't read beyond if you don't want to test
yourself.
Koppa Dasao
___
Зеҫаєлі весно!
Les Miserables forever!
My landlord for almost 9 years was found dead about 10 hours ago when
this mail was written. One of those who saw her was me. Being alone at
1am with the image of her standing in the stairs haunting me doesn't
exactly calm me down for the night.
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "Sam Stutter" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 4:27 pm ((PST))
It's a natural human response to feel uncomfortable. From an evolutionary point
of view, hanging around dead people isn't a good survival idea.
Then it boils down to two things:
1) a reminder of your own mortality. I find it quite liberating to know how
close to death we all are but usually never realise (it's morbid, I know, but
it must be addressed). Unless she's died of a fatal viral infection, your
chances of dying remain the same, at ridiculously high.
2) the effect of her death on others. In my opinion, this is the only one you
should worry about. If you're religious, the assumption is she'll go to heaven.
If you're not (like me) you know she's not in a position to worry. Worrying
about her is utterly useless If you feel upset that you'll never have her
company again, then that's alright.
There's a song by a band called "Elbow" called "The Night Will Always Win". The
sentiment is that you should never feel upset or alone by yourself. Go out,
call some mates around, go out and get hammered. But whatever you do, don't
stay alone.
Or, if you barely knew her, all you can do is worry about those who did and, in
that situation, try and come up with ways to help them get over it.
(Hello Seattle. I'm listening...)
Sam Stutter
[email protected]
"No e na il cu barri"
On 9 Dec 2011, at 00:06, Koppa Dasao <[email protected]> wrote:
> It has been some interesting weeks for me, as most here has come to
> know. But more has happened. I've got this image in my head that
> doesn't go away. I'm sure most of you have seen it on TV, is some form
> or another on CSI or other shows of the same genre. But still real
> life is something else. So don't read beyond if you don't want to test
> yourself.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Koppa Dasao
> ___
> Зеҫаєлі весно!
> Les Miserables forever!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> My landlord for almost 9 years was found dead about 10 hours ago when
> this mail was written. One of those who saw her was me. Being alone at
> 1am with the image of her standing in the stairs haunting me doesn't
> exactly calm me down for the night.
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2c. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 4:28 pm ((PST))
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Koppa Dasao <[email protected]> wrote:
> It has been some interesting weeks for me, as most here has come to
> know. But more has happened. I've got this image in my head that
> doesn't go away. I'm sure most of you have seen it on TV, is some form
> or another on CSI or other shows of the same genre. But still real
> life is something else. So don't read beyond if you don't want to test
> yourself.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Koppa Dasao
> ___
> Зеҫаєлі весно!
> Les Miserables forever!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> My landlord for almost 9 years was found dead about 10 hours ago when
> this mail was written. One of those who saw her was me. Being alone at
> 1am with the image of her standing in the stairs haunting me doesn't
> exactly calm me down for the night.
At 67 I've sat with and watched a number of people die. There comes a
time when you accept it as perfectly natural. That doesn't mean you
have to like it, though.
OB conlang: How does your conlang say "Sh-- happens?"
--gary
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2d. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "Koppa Dasao" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 4:40 pm ((PST))
Thanks! I may be alone right now, but I'm not at home. Nor has I been
since soon after it happened. It's just that he whom I'm at tonight
has gone to bed after a long days work piloting his corporate jet in
some bad weather.
As for "shit happens" in Delang.... Welauneqi kills what he likes.
Ѡелҩнеьі неьі ај ƕамі нҩті. /welɔ:neqi neqi aj ha:mi nɔti/
Koppa Dasao
___
Зеҫаєлі весно!
Les Miserables forever!
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2e. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "Koppa Dasao" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 4:42 pm ((PST))
BTW, it can also mean Welauneqi kills as he like...
Koppa Dasao
___
Зеҫаєлі весно!
Les Miserables forever!
2011/12/9 Koppa Dasao <[email protected]>:
> Thanks! I may be alone right now, but I'm not at home. Nor has I been
> since soon after it happened. It's just that he whom I'm at tonight
> has gone to bed after a long days work piloting his corporate jet in
> some bad weather.
>
> As for "shit happens" in Delang.... Welauneqi kills what he likes.
> Ѡелҩнеьі неьі ај ƕамі нҩті. /welɔ:neqi neqi aj ha:mi nɔti/
>
> Koppa Dasao
> ___
> Зеҫаєлі весно!
> Les Miserables forever!
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2f. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:24 pm ((PST))
--- On Thu, 12/8/11, Sam Stutter <[email protected]> wrote:
> Then it boils down to two things:
>
> 1) a reminder of your own mortality. I find it quite
> liberating to know how close to death we all are but
> usually never realise (it's morbid, I know, but it must be
> addressed). Unless she's died of a fatal viral infection,
> your chances of dying remain the same, at ridiculously
> high.
Yeah, death ain't easy, but it *is* the only fairly run game of chance in
the whole world. Everyone's chance of dying is 100%, at some point in our
lives. Some of us might have a couple goes at it, but eventually *everyone*
is a winner!
> 2) the effect of her death on others. In my opinion, this
> is the only one you should worry about. If you're religious,
> the assumption is she'll go to heaven. If you're not (like
> me) you know she's not in a position to worry. Worrying
> about her is utterly useless If you feel upset that
> you'll never have her company again, then that's alright.
>
> There's a song by a band called "Elbow" called "The Night
> Will Always Win". The sentiment is that you should never
> feel upset or alone by yourself. Go out, call some mates
> around, go out and get hammered. But whatever you do, don't
> stay alone.
>
> Or, if you barely knew her, all you can do is worry about
> those who did and, in that situation, try and come up with
> ways to help them get over it.
Some good advice in there. Though I wouldn't suggest our Koppa go and
get himself hammered -- I don't think his insides are up to it! ;)
Padraic
> (Hello Seattle. I'm listening...)
>
> Sam Stutter
> [email protected]
> "No e na il cu barri"
>
> On 9 Dec 2011, at 00:06, Koppa Dasao <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > It has been some interesting weeks for me, as most
> here has come to
> > know. But more has happened. I've got this image in my
> head that
> > doesn't go away. I'm sure most of you have seen it on
> TV, is some form
> > or another on CSI or other shows of the same genre.
> But still real
> > life is something else. So don't read beyond if you
> don't want to test
> > yourself.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Koppa Dasao
> > ___
> > Зеҫаєлі весно!
> > Les Miserables forever!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > My landlord for almost 9 years was found dead about 10
> hours ago when
> > this mail was written. One of those who saw her was
> me. Being alone at
> > 1am with the image of her standing in the stairs
> haunting me doesn't
> > exactly calm me down for the night.
>
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2g. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "Koppa Dasao" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:44 pm ((PST))
I'll stay on the water wagon, I, as I've got a problem with
alcohol.... I don't touch that poison.
As for my own failed attempts at meeting the Man with the Scythe,
well, after having died as a child and returned, and almost become
road kill between a truck and a mountain side, and of course my recent
endeavor into the realm of illness... I've had my share of encounters
with death. But then life only guarantees two things, pain and death.
Koppa Dasao
___
Зеҫаєлі весно!
Les Miserables forever!
2011/12/9 Padraic Brown <[email protected]>:
> --- On Thu, 12/8/11, Sam Stutter <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Then it boils down to two things:
>>
>> 1) a reminder of your own mortality. I find it quite
>> liberating to know how close to death we all are but
>> usually never realise (it's morbid, I know, but it must be
>> addressed). Unless she's died of a fatal viral infection,
>> your chances of dying remain the same, at ridiculously
>> high.
>
> Yeah, death ain't easy, but it *is* the only fairly run game of chance in
> the whole world. Everyone's chance of dying is 100%, at some point in our
> lives. Some of us might have a couple goes at it, but eventually *everyone*
> is a winner!
>
>> 2) the effect of her death on others. In my opinion, this
>> is the only one you should worry about. If you're religious,
>> the assumption is she'll go to heaven. If you're not (like
>> me) you know she's not in a position to worry. Worrying
>> about her is utterly useless If you feel upset that
>> you'll never have her company again, then that's alright.
>>
>> There's a song by a band called "Elbow" called "The Night
>> Will Always Win". The sentiment is that you should never
>> feel upset or alone by yourself. Go out, call some mates
>> around, go out and get hammered. But whatever you do, don't
>> stay alone.
>>
>> Or, if you barely knew her, all you can do is worry about
>> those who did and, in that situation, try and come up with
>> ways to help them get over it.
>
> Some good advice in there. Though I wouldn't suggest our Koppa go and
> get himself hammered -- I don't think his insides are up to it! ;)
>
> Padraic
>
>> (Hello Seattle. I'm listening...)
>>
>> Sam Stutter
>> [email protected]
>> "No e na il cu barri"
>>
>> On 9 Dec 2011, at 00:06, Koppa Dasao <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > It has been some interesting weeks for me, as most
>> here has come to
>> > know. But more has happened. I've got this image in my
>> head that
>> > doesn't go away. I'm sure most of you have seen it on
>> TV, is some form
>> > or another on CSI or other shows of the same genre.
>> But still real
>> > life is something else. So don't read beyond if you
>> don't want to test
>> > yourself.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Koppa Dasao
>> > ___
>> > Зеҫаєлі весно!
>> > Les Miserables forever!
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > My landlord for almost 9 years was found dead about 10
>> hours ago when
>> > this mail was written. One of those who saw her was
>> me. Being alone at
>> > 1am with the image of her standing in the stairs
>> haunting me doesn't
>> > exactly calm me down for the night.
>>
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2h. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 8:04 pm ((PST))
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Padraic Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yeah, death ain't easy, but it *is* the only fairly run game of chance in
> the whole world. Everyone's chance of dying is 100%, at some point in our
> lives.
There is a brighter way to look at it. If every morning when you get
up you say to yourself "I'm not going to die today." you will almost
always be right. In fact, in your entire lifetime you will only be
wrong once. That's actually a pretty good track record.
--gary
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2i. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 8:17 pm ((PST))
--- On Thu, 12/8/11, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Yeah, death ain't easy, but it *is* the only fairly
> run game of chance in
> > the whole world. Everyone's chance of dying is 100%,
> at some point in our
> > lives.
>
> There is a brighter way to look at it. If every morning
> when you get
> up you say to yourself "I'm not going to die today." you
> will almost
> always be right. In fact, in your entire lifetime you will
> only be
> wrong once. That's actually a pretty good track record.
On the other hand, there is the old bromide made famous by Auntomoanian
philosopher Wulfgard Amarok de Lupodunum: "Live every day as if it's your
last. One day you'll be right."
> --gary
Padraic
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
2j. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "R A Brown" [email protected]
Date: Fri Dec 9, 2011 3:04 am ((PST))
On 09/12/2011 00:06, Koppa Dasao wrote:
[snip]
> My landlord for almost 9 years was found dead about 10
> hours ago when this mail was written. One of those who
> saw her was me. Being alone at 1am with the image of her
> standing in the stairs haunting me doesn't exactly calm
> me down for the night.
OK - but it does nothing to my stomach.
====================================================
On 09/12/2011 00:28, Gary Shannon wrote:
[snip]
>
> At 67 I've sat with and watched a number of people die.
> There comes a time when you accept it as perfectly
> natural. That doesn't mean you have to like it, though.
Yep - at 72 I've seen a few, including my own parents.
===================================================
On 09/12/2011 01:44, Koppa Dasao wrote:
[snip]
>
> As for my own failed attempts at meeting the Man with the
> Scythe,
Isn't that Father Time?
St Francis sang of Sister Death.
==================================================
On 09/12/2011 04:17, Padraic Brown wrote:
[snip]
>
> On the other hand, there is the old bromide made famous
> by Auntomoanian philosopher Wulfgard Amarok de
> Lupodunum: "Live every day as if it's your last. One day
> you'll be right."
True - one day I'll meet Sister Death. As Socrates said
many centuries ago: "There is good hope that death is a
blessing."
I can't think of an ObConlang comment, but an ObConculture
might be whether death is perceived as male or female, and
whether as a "grim reaper" or one who brings a blessing.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.
[WELSH PROVERB]
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3.1. Re: Genealogical classification of conlangs (was: Euroclones)
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:30 pm ((PST))
--- On Wed, 12/7/11, BPJ <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: BPJ <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [CONLANG] Genealogical classification of conlangs (was:
> Euroclones)
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Wednesday, December 7, 2011, 12:44 PM
> On 2011-12-07 15:48, Padraic Brown
> wrote:
> > --- On Wed, 12/7/11, BPJ<[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> From: BPJ<[email protected]>
> >> Subject: Re: [CONLANG] Genealogical classification
> of conlangs (was: Euroclones)
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Date: Wednesday, December 7, 2011, 9:04 AM
> >> On 2011-12-07 02:31, Padraic Brown
> >> wrote:
> >>> "real" as applied to natural languages is a
> well
> >> enough known
> >>> figure of speech hereabouts
> >>
> >> Proposition
> >> -----------
> >>
> >> A figure of speech we have, appropriately, been
> moving
> >> away from.
> >
> > Probably a good thing. The *other* dichotomy, "real"
> vs. "fake" or "false"
> > has some negative connotations that we don't want
> applied to the languages
> > we devise or discover!
>
> Exactly my point. Forgive me for being picky over
> the
> definition of "real" -- as a modern Buddhist you have
> to be!
No need to ask for forgiveness -- nothing will attach to your karma for
seeking clarification! I was just using a common, if perhaps raw,
definition. Elsewhere I had used terms like "constructed" and "artificial"
and thought that it would suffice.
> >> Abstract
> >> --------
> >>
> >> The criterion for 'real language' is having (some)
> grammar
> >> and vocabulary extant in human minds or writing.
> The
> >> criterion for 'natural language' is 'having
> descended from
> >> **Proto-Human'. These two definitions don't
> overlap.
> >
> > In any event, there is a valid distinction to be made
> between languages
> > that arise naturally (hence "natural language") and
> those that are
> > purposely devised by the genius of an individual or
> group (hence
> > "constructed language").
>
> Sure. I've never denied that. The trouble is where to
> draw the line.
Always a fun topic of conversation!
> Is a heavily planned language like
> Rumantsch Grischun or Sanskrit or standard Icelandic --
> which has been purged of loanwords which once were in
> use and of a good deal of the linguistic change which
> actually did happen in 600 years -- natty conlangs or
> conny natlangs?
Well, having done some of that sort of thing myself (the recent example
of Auntimoanian should suffice to demonstrate that it is not much more
than warmed over Middle to Early Modern English), I would personally *not*
call such products "conlangs". I kind of like further refinements like
"conlangy natlang" or "natty conlang"; but probably a more official
(pompously academic?) term could be devised!
But really, a planned or guided or artifically systematised natural
language is just exactly that. It is a 100% natural language that has
been given some illdefined (and perhaps undefinable) external treatment.
I would say that a highly planned natlang, like RG, might could be at the
high end of the spectrum, while SAE (Standard Amer. Engl.) would be at
the lower end of the same spectrum (we do have some prescriptively
ordained wossnames that get propagated in all the Better Grammars and I
say count as light guiding. Neither level makes RG or SAE "conlangs" by
any normal definition or understanding of the word.
On the other hand, an intentionally altered natlang, that has been altered
to suit a particular *fictional* purpose, like Auntimoanian or Ill Bethisad
English, sort of live in the middle ground. Still basically natural
languages, though perhaps highly altered:
THese word were composed by Spencer þe Rover
who travelled thro England and most parts of Wales
He had been so reduced, which caused great confusion
And þat was þe reason he went on þe roam [...]
It tasted more sweeter þan the gold he had wasted
More sweeter þan honey and gave more content
But þe þouchts of his childer, lamentand and cryand
Broucht teares to his eyen which made him lament
> Are people conlanging when they think
> that what they are doing is purifying/unifying/reviving
> a natlang, or creating a literary/theatrical prop --
I don't think so. Or perhaps more accurately, I think they are using those
same creative muscles, but in a slightly different direction.
> Tolkien being an exception, since in his case the
> language come first, at least according to his
> statement decades later.
Well, Tolkien's languages are actually conlangs, so there's no question
about his creating a conlang v. slightly altering (or even moderately
altering) a natural langauge.
A fine line, there. I consider, for example, Newspeak to be a conlang. I
think it is sufficiently different from English to warrant some kind of
distinction. But I freely admit that the point is arguable!
> >> Protract --------
> >>
> >> If you define "language" as 'a double-articulated
> >> system of communication with a potentially
> infinite
> >> set of secondary to n-ary signs having meaning
> >> composed by combining a limited set of primary
> signs
> >> lacking meaning by themselves, and rules for how
> to
> >> compose new signs from existing ones', i.e. a
> >> phoneme/grapheme/chereme/chromeme... inventory, a
> >> vocabulary, a morphology and a syntax which can
> at
> >> least potentially be used together to communicate
> >> between people, then most conlangs, as opposed to
> >> 'conlang sketches' with only a fragmental grammar
> >> and morphology, are real languages, since the
> only
> >> thing which distinguishes natlangs
> >
> > Again, there are "real" languages and there are
> > "real" languages. I'm certainly not disputing the
> > factual existence of a conlang. Only that as far as
> > determining relatedness is concerned, fiction and
> > fact ought to be kept separate.
>
> The question to me, and I thought to you, is whether a
> language can be considered 'real' when it possesses
> only _langage_ and not _parole_ (terms which I really
> wanted to avoid -- I'd rather say _vyāhāra_ and
> _bhāṣā_
> -- or _vakya_, _bhāṣā_ rather being _langue_!
> :-).
Not at all! I simply meant "real = naturally occuring or arising naturally"
simply as opposed to constructed or engineered or designed or any other
near-synonym.
> I for one think the answer is yes. If you think the
> answer is no the question is not whether conlangs
> (other than Esperanto) are real in the sense of 'being
> things', but whether they are _real languages_, i.e.
> how many and how much of the characteristic features of
> a typical language must a thing possess to be a
> _langue_ -- I read you as saying that a language
> without _parole_ is not a _real language_ -- claiming
> that Brithenig or Ithkuil are not _real things_ would
> be patently absurd!
Well, of course. I am actually not overly fond of "parole" and "langue"
(and that's probably cos I never really got what the big deal was). For me,
a conlang is an existing entity, and so is real. Even if it's a mere
sketch, it still has an assumed or "virtual" completeness that we simply
are not privy to. That doesn't change its reality. That doesn't alter its
fundamental equivalence to every other existent (or non-existent) language
in its ability to be spoken or otherwise be used to communicate.
> If having a _parole_ is essential
> to being a _langue_, then very few conlangs are
> _langues_, and very many natlangs -- the dead ones --
> are not either.
I guess for me, neither langue *nor* parole are inherently necessary to
understand something as a "language".
> > But for what it's worth, I'd not say that a language
> > sketch is any less "real" than a full fledged
> > conlang. A sketch still hints at realities
> > unrevealed. Just as a grammatical treatise of Gaulish
> > hints at a moreness that we can not now know; so a
> > conlang sketch hints at something more than what the
> > conlanger has chosen to reveal.
>
> The question to me is how much of a _langage_ must be
> manifest as opposed to potential, i.e. what degree of
> _abhivyakti vidhi_ (literally 'manifestation of
> grammar') must be developed for a conlang sketch to
> become a _lang(u|ag)e_, or preserved in historical record
> in the case of a dead natlang?
For me, the answer to that question is "practically nothing". This is
because, for any given partial conlang sketch, I hold that there is,
existing someplace, a complete grammar. It doesn't exist in this plane,
and we are not privy to it, but that assumed completeness allows me to
avoid having to sort out *how much* a conlang actually exists! For me, it
just exists, and that's that. The only problem is I may not full access
to its description.
I have a file of such things (which I call "conlang shorts"). I don't
consider any of them any less of a language just because I've been too
lazy to short of interest to work them out further. Sometimes, they don't
need to worked out fully in order to satisfy some element of fiction. For
example, there is a language in the World known as Yllemese that consists
of exactly one ultra-short text that can't even be definitively translated
because the key word can be interpreted in a couple different ways. The
grammar consists of only a couple suggestions and lot of question marks.
Most of the lexicon consists of words thought to have been borrowed by
surrounding languages. The fiction is that this singular text in inscribed
in the crown of the Yllurian kingdom, and that's all that is known of it.
The description is "complete" in that the fiction is satisfied.
Can't use it to communicate anything, and can barely sort out what *can*
be communicated using the remains. Yet I consider it a "real" language. It
has, in its (fictional) past a body of speakers, well known lexicon and
understood grammar. It's just that *now*, thousands of years after it
ceased being a common language, we're no longer privy to those once well
known facts of the language.
> One obvious measure is
> if and how much you can speak/write in it. However
> that measure is not without its problem, as a type,
> either. Sohlob has big holes in its _langage_, but
> on
> the other hand I don't feel free to fill those holes
> with just anything: it has to 'fit' as Tolkien said. In
> reality 'fit' is of course determined by some kind of
> aesthetic and _Sprachgefühl_ on my part, but it damn
> well feels sometimes as if I'm discovering something
> which has a manifest existence outside my mind and my
> writings!
Quite. This is how I view conlanging in general. Not so much a matter of
"making" or "creating" as brushing away the dust and bits to reveal what
was already there.
Padraic
Messages in this topic (154)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
