There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Yet another way to build a CONLANG from scratch
From: Gary Shannon
1b. Re: Yet another way to build a CONLANG from scratch
From: MorphemeAddict
1c. Re: Yet another way to build a CONLANG from scratch
From: Gary Shannon
2a. Re: A Self-Segmenting Orthography
From: David McCann
2b. Re: A Self-Segmenting Orthography
From: And Rosta
2c. Re: A Self-Segmenting Orthography
From: Jörg Rhiemeier
2d. Re: A Self-Segmenting Orthography
From: R A Brown
3a. Re: Oh great joy!
From: David McCann
3b. Re: Oh great joy!
From: And Rosta
3c. Extrafictional and intrafictional (was: Oh great joy!)
From: Jörg Rhiemeier
4a. Re: Natlang question
From: Roger Mills
4b. Re: Natlang question
From: Charlie Brickner
5a. Re: Making a memorable English phrase for 80 bits of data
From: MorphemeAddict
5b. Re: Making a memorable English phrase for 80 bits of data
From: Alex Fink
5c. Re: Making a memorable English phrase for 80 bits of data
From: MorphemeAddict
6a. Re: Name That Glyph | Round Three « Pseudoglyphs
From: Adam Walker
7a. Re: Name That Glyph | Round Three « Pseudog lyphs
From: Sam Stutter
7b. Re: Name That Glyph | Round Three « Pseudog lyphs
From: Galen Buttitta
7c. Re: Name That Glyph | Round Three « Pseudog lyphs
From: Sam Stutter
8. The 2011 Smiley Award Winner: Okuna
From: David Peterson
9. A Series of Musings on Unusual Features
From: Logan Kearsley
10.1. Re: OT: gendered usage of "fiancé(e)" -- plus obCon lang vocabula
From: Mia Harper (Soderquist)
11a. conlang cards
From: Patrick Dunn
11b. Re: conlang cards
From: Mia Harper (Soderquist)
12. CHAT: Returned...
From: Mia Harper (Soderquist)
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Yet another way to build a CONLANG from scratch
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:57 am ((PST))
I'm going to propose a methodology for this project: Feel free to
disagree and/or discuss:
This is also posted here for reference: http://fiziwig.com/conlang/lessons.html
What I am proposing is a collaborative conlang built by multiple
authors where each author is responsible for a given specific lesson
in what will become a textbook of the language. This textbook is built
one chapter after another by each participant in turn. The general
outline of the textbook would be based on an existing language
textbook.
Obviously, the textbook as a whole must have some unity and
cohesiveness, and it is for that reason that an outline of concrete
benchmarks is created. Basically, each lesson will be very short,
modeled on the lessons in the book First Spanish Course by E.C. Hills
and J.D.M. Ford, copyright 1917.
Each lesson will cover whatever grammar and vocabulary is necessary to
produce the model sentences, and no more. For example, lesson one
covers the vocabulary: I have; you have; the indefinite article (if
any); the conjunction "and" and the nouns: (a) pen; (a) pencil; (a)
book; (a) paper. At the conclusion of lesson one we must know how to
write such sentences as "I have a book." and "You have a pen and a
pencil."
Note that lesson one must not stray outside these parameters. The
lesson contains no mention of plural nouns, so pluralization must not
be discussed. That subject belongs to whatever participant draws the
chapter that covers plurals. Nor is there any mention of a definite
article (if any). Again, that topic belongs to whoever draws that
chapter in the rotation.
There are 50 lessons in the model textbook, and while each lesson is
very short, the cumulative effect is that by lesson 50 the grammar and
vocabulary has covered some very sophisticated territory.
Some sample Lesson Benchmarks
Lesson 1
Vocabulary: I have; you have; the indefinite article (if any); the
conjunction "and" and the nouns: (a) pen; (a) pencil; (a) book; (a)
paper. Typical Sentences: "I have a book." and "You have a pen and a
pencil."
Lesson 2
Vocabulary: I write; you write; (an) exercise; ink; prepositions:
with; on; in; Typical Sentences: "Do I(you) have a pen?"; "I write on
paper with a pen." "Do you write on paper with pen and ink?"; "I write
in a book."; "Do you write in a book."
Lesson 3
Vocabulary: Definite article (if any); pluralizing nouns; 3rd person
singular verbs; (I/you/he/she) study; (I/you/he/she) teach; the
student (masc and fem. versions if different); the lesson; the teacher
(masc and fem. versions if different); the blackboard; the chalk; sir;
ma'am; miss; yes; who? Typical Sentences: "I have the books."; "Do you
have the books?"; "Yes, sir; I have the books and I study the
lessons."; "Who teaches the lessons?"; "The teacher teaches the
lessons."; "Do I teach the lessons?"; "Yes, ma'am; you teach the
lessons."
Lesson 4
Vocabulary: Position and inflection (if any) of adjectives; white;
black; red; difficult; easy; industrious (diligent); much, many, very,
all; also; the house; conjugate copula (if any) for (subj) is/are
(adj) forms; Typical Sentences: "I have black ink and a pen."; "Do you
have white paper also?"; "Yes, sir; I write the exercises on white
paper."; "Are the exercises difficult?"; "Yes, sir; all of the lesson
is very difficult."
And Skipping Ahead to sample Lesson 27
Lesson 27
Vocabulary: architect; type (class; kind); brick; door; roof;
stairway; gas; living room; shingle; telephone; large; comfortable; to
place; to build; to cover; to ascend; the house; Typical Sentences:
"My uncle just bought an eight-room house."; "It is not large, but it
is very comfortable."; "All the rooms in the house are heated with
steam."; "On the upper floor are four bedrooms and a bathroom."; "The
house was built by an architect who lives in Chicago."
And Skipping Ahead to sample Lesson 39
Lesson 39
Vocabulary: Some words having to do with trains and buses... Typical
Sentences: "We will leave Buenos Aires for Santiago, Chile the day
after tomorrow."; "The express train leaves at half-past ten in the
morning."; "Before departing we must say goodbye to all our friends
and of some acquaintances."; "My father will get our tickets tomorrow
if they will permit him."; "We will take a taxi to go to the railway
station."; "The bus would be cheaper, of course, but we have a lot of
parcels and handbags to carry with us."
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Alex Fink <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:04:51 -0800, Padraic Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>--- On Mon, 12/19/11, MorphemeAddict <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> It might be fun to have different
>>> people write the lessons, a relay. Each
>>> person in the relay only knows the lessons before his own,
>>> and nobody knows
>>> how it'll turn out until they decide to stop writing
>>> lessons. That could be very long project!
>>
>>Now *that* sounds like a fun project! Broic go leor!
>
> It sounds like we should start one! Accordingly I made a page for it on
> Frath:
> http://www.frathwiki.com/Conlang_Textbook_Relay
> Put your name down there if you're interested.
>
> As for figuring out the phonology, I think it would be simpler to just let
> it settle out as we go. But I would be in favour of a gentlemen's agreement
> that, from lesson four or five onwards, people should strongly rein in their
> impulses to introduce new phonemes.
>
> This game also puts me in mind of the Round Robin Conlang started by Pete
> Bleackley:
> http://www.frathwiki.com/Round_Robin_Conlang
> so maybe that is some indication of how long we can expect this one to be
> able to last.
>
> Alex
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Yet another way to build a CONLANG from scratch
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 10:17 am ((PST))
Rather than follow such a specific example, another possibility is to limit
each lesson to a small number (5..10) of new words and only one or two new
grammar features.
stevo
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm going to propose a methodology for this project: Feel free to
> disagree and/or discuss:
>
> This is also posted here for reference:
> http://fiziwig.com/conlang/lessons.html
>
> What I am proposing is a collaborative conlang built by multiple
> authors where each author is responsible for a given specific lesson
> in what will become a textbook of the language. This textbook is built
> one chapter after another by each participant in turn. The general
> outline of the textbook would be based on an existing language
> textbook.
>
> Obviously, the textbook as a whole must have some unity and
> cohesiveness, and it is for that reason that an outline of concrete
> benchmarks is created. Basically, each lesson will be very short,
> modeled on the lessons in the book First Spanish Course by E.C. Hills
> and J.D.M. Ford, copyright 1917.
>
> Each lesson will cover whatever grammar and vocabulary is necessary to
> produce the model sentences, and no more. For example, lesson one
> covers the vocabulary: I have; you have; the indefinite article (if
> any); the conjunction "and" and the nouns: (a) pen; (a) pencil; (a)
> book; (a) paper. At the conclusion of lesson one we must know how to
> write such sentences as "I have a book." and "You have a pen and a
> pencil."
>
> Note that lesson one must not stray outside these parameters. The
> lesson contains no mention of plural nouns, so pluralization must not
> be discussed. That subject belongs to whatever participant draws the
> chapter that covers plurals. Nor is there any mention of a definite
> article (if any). Again, that topic belongs to whoever draws that
> chapter in the rotation.
>
> There are 50 lessons in the model textbook, and while each lesson is
> very short, the cumulative effect is that by lesson 50 the grammar and
> vocabulary has covered some very sophisticated territory.
>
> Some sample Lesson Benchmarks
>
> Lesson 1
>
> Vocabulary: I have; you have; the indefinite article (if any); the
> conjunction "and" and the nouns: (a) pen; (a) pencil; (a) book; (a)
> paper. Typical Sentences: "I have a book." and "You have a pen and a
> pencil."
>
> Lesson 2
>
> Vocabulary: I write; you write; (an) exercise; ink; prepositions:
> with; on; in; Typical Sentences: "Do I(you) have a pen?"; "I write on
> paper with a pen." "Do you write on paper with pen and ink?"; "I write
> in a book."; "Do you write in a book."
>
> Lesson 3
>
> Vocabulary: Definite article (if any); pluralizing nouns; 3rd person
> singular verbs; (I/you/he/she) study; (I/you/he/she) teach; the
> student (masc and fem. versions if different); the lesson; the teacher
> (masc and fem. versions if different); the blackboard; the chalk; sir;
> ma'am; miss; yes; who? Typical Sentences: "I have the books."; "Do you
> have the books?"; "Yes, sir; I have the books and I study the
> lessons."; "Who teaches the lessons?"; "The teacher teaches the
> lessons."; "Do I teach the lessons?"; "Yes, ma'am; you teach the
> lessons."
>
> Lesson 4
>
> Vocabulary: Position and inflection (if any) of adjectives; white;
> black; red; difficult; easy; industrious (diligent); much, many, very,
> all; also; the house; conjugate copula (if any) for (subj) is/are
> (adj) forms; Typical Sentences: "I have black ink and a pen."; "Do you
> have white paper also?"; "Yes, sir; I write the exercises on white
> paper."; "Are the exercises difficult?"; "Yes, sir; all of the lesson
> is very difficult."
>
> And Skipping Ahead to sample Lesson 27
>
> Lesson 27
>
> Vocabulary: architect; type (class; kind); brick; door; roof;
> stairway; gas; living room; shingle; telephone; large; comfortable; to
> place; to build; to cover; to ascend; the house; Typical Sentences:
> "My uncle just bought an eight-room house."; "It is not large, but it
> is very comfortable."; "All the rooms in the house are heated with
> steam."; "On the upper floor are four bedrooms and a bathroom."; "The
> house was built by an architect who lives in Chicago."
>
> And Skipping Ahead to sample Lesson 39
>
> Lesson 39
>
> Vocabulary: Some words having to do with trains and buses... Typical
> Sentences: "We will leave Buenos Aires for Santiago, Chile the day
> after tomorrow."; "The express train leaves at half-past ten in the
> morning."; "Before departing we must say goodbye to all our friends
> and of some acquaintances."; "My father will get our tickets tomorrow
> if they will permit him."; "We will take a taxi to go to the railway
> station."; "The bus would be cheaper, of course, but we have a lot of
> parcels and handbags to carry with us."
>
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Alex Fink <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 20:04:51 -0800, Padraic Brown <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >>--- On Mon, 12/19/11, MorphemeAddict <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It might be fun to have different
> >>> people write the lessons, a relay. Each
> >>> person in the relay only knows the lessons before his own,
> >>> and nobody knows
> >>> how it'll turn out until they decide to stop writing
> >>> lessons. That could be very long project!
> >>
> >>Now *that* sounds like a fun project! Broic go leor!
> >
> > It sounds like we should start one! Accordingly I made a page for it on
> Frath:
> > http://www.frathwiki.com/Conlang_Textbook_Relay
> > Put your name down there if you're interested.
> >
> > As for figuring out the phonology, I think it would be simpler to just
> let
> > it settle out as we go. But I would be in favour of a gentlemen's
> agreement
> > that, from lesson four or five onwards, people should strongly rein in
> their
> > impulses to introduce new phonemes.
> >
> > This game also puts me in mind of the Round Robin Conlang started by Pete
> > Bleackley:
> > http://www.frathwiki.com/Round_Robin_Conlang
> > so maybe that is some indication of how long we can expect this one to be
> > able to last.
> >
> > Alex
>
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Yet another way to build a CONLANG from scratch
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 10:40 am ((PST))
I think we already did one that way. See:
http://www.frathwiki.com/Round_Robin_Conlang
My reason for proposing the specific example was twofold: Structure,
and completeness. (And to be different from the Round Robin linked
above.)
Rather than having new contributions heading off in all directions,
there a sequential logic to the whole project where each lesson builds
on the ones before. And the whole project will last exactly 50 turns,
because that's how many lessons there are in the original book. After
50 turns the language is "complete" in the sense that complex
sentences can be written and there are no glaring gaps in the
specification.
There is also the fact that writing the next lesson becomes a very
well defined task. One needn't ponder which words to coin, or which
grammatical features to create. Or how much is enough, or is what I
did too much for one chapter? The task is clearly specified by the
vocabulary and sentences in model chapter.
Each contribution would be at most a dozen words and a dozen
sentences. (Which is why I picked the model that I did.) Something
that can be done in an afternoon. 50 such afternoons, distributed
among the participants, and we have a COMPLETE textbook for a new
conlang. Project done. Put a bow on it and put it on the shelf for
posterity to admire. :)
--gary
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:16 AM, MorphemeAddict <[email protected]> wrote:
> Rather than follow such a specific example, another possibility is to limit
> each lesson to a small number (5..10) of new words and only one or two new
> grammar features.
>
> stevo
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: A Self-Segmenting Orthography
Posted by: "David McCann" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:22 am ((PST))
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:31:56 -0500
MorphemeAddict <[email protected]> wrote:
> Re: white space, I haven't been able so far to decide whether white
> space is over-rated, or languages such as Thai (and Chinese), which
> don't separate individual words by white space, simply do their users
> a disservice.
The fact that white space (that great Irish contribution to
civilisation) spread throughout Europe, even to Greek, Armenian, and
Georgian, seems to suggest that it was a Good Thing.
Messages in this topic (23)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: A Self-Segmenting Orthography
Posted by: "And Rosta" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 10:56 am ((PST))
David McCann, On 20/12/2011 16:22:
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:31:56 -0500
> MorphemeAddict<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Re: white space, I haven't been able so far to decide whether white
>> space is over-rated, or languages such as Thai (and Chinese), which
>> don't separate individual words by white space, simply do their users
>> a disservice.
>
> The fact that white space (that great Irish contribution to
> civilisation) spread throughout Europe, even to Greek, Armenian, and
> Georgian, seems to suggest that it was a Good Thing.
Is it white space per se, or just the orthographic marking or word-boundaries,
or even just the ready identifiability of word boundaries?
ForExample,CamelCaseIsFairlyEasyToRead,AndWouldPresumablyBeEvenEasierIfOneWereUsedToIt.
My own hunch is that the useful thing is the readily visible word boundaries,
of which white space is a particuarly visible but also extravagant example. In
Livagian, word-boundaries are unambiguous if you have the whole text, but
potentially not if you have only a fragment. Livagian compromises by putting
white space between sentences but not between words in the same sentence. This
means that the destructive effects of a fragmentary written text apply only to
the sentences at the fragment boundaries. Although spaces between words would
be quite practicable, since grammatical word boundaries are clear (unlike in,
say, English), words in multiword sentences are clearly parts of sentences, and
to separate them by spaces would feel like putting spaces between bound
morphemes would in other languages. Every word's inflections specify implicitly
whether it is a one-word sentence, or if it combines with other words, and if
so, whether it ends the sentence.
--And.
Messages in this topic (23)
________________________________________________________________________
2c. Re: A Self-Segmenting Orthography
Posted by: "Jörg Rhiemeier" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:13 pm ((PST))
Hallo conlangers!
On Tuesday 20 December 2011 19:56:23 And Rosta wrote:
> David McCann, On 20/12/2011 16:22:
> > On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:31:56 -0500
> >
> > MorphemeAddict<[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Re: white space, I haven't been able so far to decide whether white
> >> space is over-rated, or languages such as Thai (and Chinese), which
> >> don't separate individual words by white space, simply do their users
> >> a disservice.
> >
> > The fact that white space (that great Irish contribution to
> > civilisation) spread throughout Europe, even to Greek, Armenian, and
> > Georgian, seems to suggest that it was a Good Thing.
>
> Is it white space per se, or just the orthographic marking or
> word-boundaries, or even just the ready identifiability of word
> boundaries?
> ForExample,CamelCaseIsFairlyEasyToRead,AndWouldPresumablyBeEvenEasierIfOne
> WereUsedToIt.
>
> My own hunch is that the useful thing is the readily visible word
> boundaries, of which white space is a particuarly visible but also
> extravagant example.
Right. White space is only *one* way of marking word boundaries;
it could just as well be done with interpuncts (AFAIK, several
languages of ancient Italy did that) or, as you say, with CamelCase
or anything like that. The recently discussed (though for other
reasons) Phaistos Disk has dividing lines between some of its
glyphs (not that we know whether those dividers actually mark word
boundaries or not, but that is at least a plausible hypothesis).
--
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
"Bêsel asa Êm, a Êm atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Êmel." - SiM 1:1
Messages in this topic (23)
________________________________________________________________________
2d. Re: A Self-Segmenting Orthography
Posted by: "R A Brown" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:55 pm ((PST))
On 20/12/2011 20:12, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
[snip]
>
> Right. White space is only *one* way of marking word
> boundaries; it could just as well be done with
> interpuncts (AFAIK, several languages of ancient Italy
> did that) or, as you say, with CamelCase or anything like
> that. The recently discussed (though for other reasons)
> Phaistos Disk has dividing lines between some of its
> glyphs (not that we know whether those dividers actually
> mark word boundaries or not, but that is at least a
> plausible hypothesis).
The earliest Eteocretan inscriptions use a vertical bar as a
word divider; see:
http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Eteocretan/Dreros1.html
http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Eteocretan/Praisos1.html
--
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 (23)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Oh great joy!
Posted by: "David McCann" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:38 am ((PST))
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 22:30:14 -0600
Eric Christopherson <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've wondered for a while this question: Does anyone have terminology
> to describe the changes a language goes through in "con"time, versus
> the changes the language (in its various diachronic stages, if it's
> diachronic) goes through in real time?
I use 'external history' (e.g. the process of revising Romlang A into
Liburnese) and 'internal history' (the orthographic experiments of the
19th century and the ongoing change of [Å] into [ž]).
Messages in this topic (12)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Oh great joy!
Posted by: "And Rosta" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 10:26 am ((PST))
David McCann, On 20/12/2011 16:37:
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 22:30:14 -0600
> Eric Christopherson<[email protected]> wrote:
>> I've wondered for a while this question: Does anyone have terminology
>> to describe the changes a language goes through in "con"time, versus
>> the changes the language (in its various diachronic stages, if it's
>> diachronic) goes through in real time?
>
> I use 'external history' (e.g. the process of revising Romlang A into
> Liburnese) and 'internal history' (the orthographic experiments of the
> 19th century and the ongoing change of [Å] into [ž]).
But in historical linguistics, 'internal history' covers how the language
itself has changed and 'external history' covers the sociocultural influences
on the language. E.g. for English, loss of inflection is part of internal
history and diglossia in the Danelaw is part of external history.
I use the terms 'intrafictional' and 'extrafictional' for the distinction Eric
asked about.
--And.
Messages in this topic (12)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Extrafictional and intrafictional (was: Oh great joy!)
Posted by: "Jörg Rhiemeier" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:07 pm ((PST))
Hallo conlangers!
On Tuesday 20 December 2011 19:26:09 And Rosta wrote:
> David McCann, On 20/12/2011 16:37:
> > On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 22:30:14 -0600
> >
> > Eric Christopherson<[email protected]> wrote:
> >> I've wondered for a while this question: Does anyone have terminology
> >> to describe the changes a language goes through in "con"time, versus
> >> the changes the language (in its various diachronic stages, if it's
> >> diachronic) goes through in real time?
> >
> > I use 'external history' (e.g. the process of revising Romlang A into
> > Liburnese) and 'internal history' (the orthographic experiments of the
> > 19th century and the ongoing change of [Å] into [ž]).
>
> But in historical linguistics, 'internal history' covers how the language
> itself has changed and 'external history' covers the sociocultural
> influences on the language. E.g. for English, loss of inflection is part
> of internal history and diglossia in the Danelaw is part of external
> history.
Yes. The convention used by David McCann is widespread in the
conlang scene, perhaps because Helge Fauskanger uses it in his
(excellent) web pages on Tolkien's languages. But thanks for
alerting us about the actual usage of _internal history_ and
_external history_ in historical linguistics; the, as I shall
call it here, "Ardalambion" convention is indeed rather
misleading, and it hadn't felt right to me, either.
> I use the terms 'intrafictional' and 'extrafictional' for the distinction
> Eric asked about.
Yes, that is a good and unambiguous pair of adjectives, and also
quite commonly encountered in description of fictional languages.
Other possibilities include _project history_ or _meta-history_
for extrafictional history and _in-world history_ for
intrafictional history, but _extrafictional_ and _intrafictional_
form a nice and consistent pair.
--
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
"Bêsel asa Êm, a Êm atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Êmel." - SiM 1:1
Messages in this topic (12)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: Natlang question
Posted by: "Roger Mills" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:54 am ((PST))
From: Charlie Brickner <[email protected]>
On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 21:30:07 -0800, Roger Mills <[email protected]>
wrote:
>I've always been confused by "onshore" vs. "offshore" winds.
"offshore" = away from the shore: "The storm moved offshore." "The boat is
anchored offshore."
"onshore" = toward or on the shore: "The onshore patrol found the abandoned
vessel."
====================================
(W) Gulf of Mex. | FLA | Atl.Ocean (E)
So when I visit Florida and hear the weather forecast, if I'm in Miami on the
east coast, offshore means land > ocean i.e. W > E and onshore means ocean >
land, E > W
(And if I were in Tampa on the west coast, it would be reversed, right?)
Somehow I had formed the impression that onshore meant 'from the land > ocean',
offshore 'ocean > land'
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: Natlang question
Posted by: "Charlie Brickner" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 10:20 am ((PST))
On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 08:51:38 -0800, Roger Mills <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>(W) Gulf of Mex. | FLA | Atl.Ocean (E)
>
>
> So when I visit Florida and hear the weather forecast, if I'm in Miami on the
east coast, offshore means land > ocean i.e. W > E and onshore means
ocean > land, E > W
>
>(And if I were in Tampa on the west coast, it would be reversed, right?)
>
That's right.
>Somehow I had formed the impression that onshore meant 'from the land >
ocean', offshore 'ocean > land'
Maybe it would help to think of the whole phrase.
The storm moved "off of" the shore and onto what? onto the water.
The boat is anchored "off of" the shore and on what? on the water.
The "onshore" patrol is walking on the shore.
I personally have never used the term "onshore patrol". My father was in the
U.S. Navy and we got to know the term "shore patrol". This was a naval
police force that helped local police with any problems they encountered with
the sailors. In other words, they were patroling on the shore and not on
shipboard.
Charlie
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. Re: Making a memorable English phrase for 80 bits of data
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 9:27 am ((PST))
I'm confused by the way you're using 'bit'. A single unicode character
(4-digit hex) uses 16 bits, so 80 bits is just 5 unicode characters. How
are you getting "a 10 word phrase" out of that?
And what does "the OED has ~250k words (~= 18 bits)" mean? How is about
250000 words approximately equal to 18 bits?
stevo
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 5:12 AM, Sai <[email protected]> wrote:
> What would be the best way to create a phrase in English that
> represents 80 bits of entropy (that of a Tor .onion url; vs 32 bits
> for IPv4)?
>
> For reference, the OED has ~250k words (~= 18 bits). So a worst-case
> answer is e.g. "divide it into 5 16-bit numbers and just concatenate
> the OED words at those numbers" or "divide it into 10 8-bit numbers
> and make a 10 word phrase from 256 common words that the desired word
> class for that slot".
>
> However, I think we could do better than that. How?
>
> Feel free to use tricks like having multiple phrase templates or the
> like. Formal requirements are that:
> a) it is a valid, if very absurdist, English phrase (eg "Barnaby
> thoughtfully mangles simplistic yellow camels" is fine),
> b) it uniquely represents 80 bits of uncontrolled data,
> c) it is short enough to be easily memorized, and
> d) it doesn't depend on any external service, i.e. it could be
> implemented with a small amount of client-side code plus a canonical
> static dictionary file
>
> - Sai
>
> P.S. For more technical background, see
> also:http://blog.rabidgremlin.com/2010/11/28/4-little-words/
>
> http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/ecllk/the_4_little_word_protocol_4lw_for_remembering/c173wme
> https://github.com/hellais/Onion-url
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zooko's_triangle
> https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/petname-tool/
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/HiddenServiceNames
>
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
5b. Re: Making a memorable English phrase for 80 bits of data
Posted by: "Alex Fink" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 9:53 am ((PST))
On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 12:27:20 -0500, MorphemeAddict <[email protected]> wrote:
>I'm confused by the way you're using 'bit'. A single unicode character
>(4-digit hex) uses 16 bits, so 80 bits is just 5 unicode characters. How
>are you getting "a 10 word phrase" out of that?
>And what does "the OED has ~250k words (~= 18 bits)" mean? How is about
>250000 words approximately equal to 18 bits?
>stevo
We're talking about bits of entropy; you can think of this, loosely, as the
number of bits it would take to store the data in question if you used _the
densest possible (decodable) encoding_ for such data.
At 16 bits per letter, Unicode is certainly not the densest possible
encoding for English words! You could get away with 5 bits per letter with
00000 = 'a', 00001 = 'b', ..., 11001 = 'z'. And even that isn't the best
possible; if e.g. you gave shorter codes to more frequent letters and longer
codes to rare ones, you could get away with fewer bits (on the average, and
it is the average that counts). Etc.
If I have a piece of data and you know it's a word from the OED, then I can
convey which word it is by telling you only 18 bits, with the following
scheme: look up which position it comes in in the OED ("a" is word 1, "a2"
is word 2, "a1" 3, "aa" 4, "aal" 5, "Aalenian" 6, ...) and write down that
number as an 18-bit binary number. Hence there's (at most!) 18 bits of
entropy in choosing one word from the OED.
Here's a different way to ask Sai's question: provide a list of 2^80
different English sentences so that
a) they are valid, if very absurdist, English phrase (eg "Barnaby
thoughtfully mangles simplistic yellow camels" is fine),
b) ---
c) each one is short enough to be easily memorized, and
d) you can write down the list (in theory) without use of any external
service, i.e. it could be implemented with a small amount of client-side
code plus a canonical static dictionary file
Alex
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
5c. Re: Making a memorable English phrase for 80 bits of data
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 10:06 am ((PST))
Okay, that clears up a lot for me. Thanks.
stevo
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Alex Fink <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 12:27:20 -0500, MorphemeAddict <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >I'm confused by the way you're using 'bit'. A single unicode character
> >(4-digit hex) uses 16 bits, so 80 bits is just 5 unicode characters. How
> >are you getting "a 10 word phrase" out of that?
> >And what does "the OED has ~250k words (~= 18 bits)" mean? How is about
> >250000 words approximately equal to 18 bits?
> >stevo
>
> We're talking about bits of entropy; you can think of this, loosely, as the
> number of bits it would take to store the data in question if you used _the
> densest possible (decodable) encoding_ for such data.
>
> At 16 bits per letter, Unicode is certainly not the densest possible
> encoding for English words! You could get away with 5 bits per letter with
> 00000 = 'a', 00001 = 'b', ..., 11001 = 'z'. And even that isn't the best
> possible; if e.g. you gave shorter codes to more frequent letters and
> longer
> codes to rare ones, you could get away with fewer bits (on the average, and
> it is the average that counts). Etc.
>
> If I have a piece of data and you know it's a word from the OED, then I can
> convey which word it is by telling you only 18 bits, with the following
> scheme: look up which position it comes in in the OED ("a" is word 1, "a2"
> is word 2, "a1" 3, "aa" 4, "aal" 5, "Aalenian" 6, ...) and write down that
> number as an 18-bit binary number. Hence there's (at most!) 18 bits of
> entropy in choosing one word from the OED.
>
> Here's a different way to ask Sai's question: provide a list of 2^80
> different English sentences so that
> a) they are valid, if very absurdist, English phrase (eg "Barnaby
> thoughtfully mangles simplistic yellow camels" is fine),
> b) ---
> c) each one is short enough to be easily memorized, and
> d) you can write down the list (in theory) without use of any external
> service, i.e. it could be implemented with a small amount of client-side
> code plus a canonical static dictionary file
>
> Alex
>
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6a. Re: Name That Glyph | Round Three « Pseudoglyphs
Posted by: "Adam Walker" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 11:08 am ((PST))
Peru esti nil ledji djul Domi
E3 -- fire
G3 -- spider
I4 -- Korean
Peru esti nil ledji djul Dominu ul su levachu, ed nil su ledji medidad peu'l
dji peu'l nopi.
Saumu 1:2
________________________________
From: A. Mendes <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 7:28 PM
Subject: Name That Glyph | Round Three « Pseudoglyphs
Happy Holidays All. Round 2 results are out. Round 3 begins.
Cheers to everyone who took part.
http://pseudoglyphs.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/name-that-glyph-round-three/
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
7a. Re: Name That Glyph | Round Three « Pseudog lyphs
Posted by: "Sam Stutter" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 11:53 am ((PST))
A1 - mother
H1 - plummet
I1 - rushes / tall grass
A2 - run towards
J2 - defend
I2 - queen (sits "on the right hand of" "king". Both look like crowns, upon
thrones, holding sceptres)
A3 - flee
D3 - triumph
G3 - meet / converge
J3 - assault
A4 - discard
B4 - retain
I4 - king
(I'm using left and right according to the traditions in western cinema, where
"away" is left to right and "towards" is right to left)
Loving them, btw
Sam Stutter
[email protected]
"No e na il cu barri"
On 20 Dec 2011, at 01:28, A. Mendes wrote:
> Happy Holidays All. Round 2 results are out. Round 3 begins.
>
> Cheers to everyone who took part.
>
> http://pseudoglyphs.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/name-that-glyph-round-three/
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
7b. Re: Name That Glyph | Round Three « Pseudog lyphs
Posted by: "Galen Buttitta" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:39 pm ((PST))
A4 Extract
C3 Geyser
C4 Actor (because it looks like the ubiquitous scene from
*Hamlet*wherein whatshisname is holding the skull)
E1 Wind sock
E4 Flag
F2 Campfire
F4 Rabbit
J2 Trapeze artist
End of line.
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Sam Stutter <[email protected]> wrote:
> A1 - mother
> H1 - plummet
> I1 - rushes / tall grass
> A2 - run towards
> J2 - defend
> I2 - queen (sits "on the right hand of" "king". Both look like crowns,
> upon thrones, holding sceptres)
> A3 - flee
> D3 - triumph
> G3 - meet / converge
> J3 - assault
> A4 - discard
> B4 - retain
> I4 - king
>
> (I'm using left and right according to the traditions in western cinema,
> where "away" is left to right and "towards" is right to left)
>
> Loving them, btw
>
> Sam Stutter
> [email protected]
> "No e na il cu barri"
>
>
>
> On 20 Dec 2011, at 01:28, A. Mendes wrote:
>
> > Happy Holidays All. Round 2 results are out. Round 3 begins.
> >
> > Cheers to everyone who took part.
> >
> >
> http://pseudoglyphs.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/name-that-glyph-round-three/
>
--
S A T O R
A R E P O
T E N E T
O P E R A
R O T A S
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
7c. Re: Name That Glyph | Round Three « Pseudog lyphs
Posted by: "Sam Stutter" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:03 pm ((PST))
On 20 Dec 2011, at 20:38, Galen Buttitta <[email protected]>
wrote:
> A4 â Extract
> C3 â Geyser
> C4 â Actor (because it looks like the ubiquitous scene from
> *Hamlet*wherein whatshisname is holding the skull)
The character you're thinking of is "Hamlet" :)
> E1 â Wind sock
> E4 â Flag
> F2 â Campfire
> F4 â Rabbit
> J2 â Trapeze artist
>
> End of line.
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Sam Stutter <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> A1 - mother
>> H1 - plummet
>> I1 - rushes / tall grass
>> A2 - run towards
>> J2 - defend
>> I2 - queen (sits "on the right hand of" "king". Both look like crowns,
>> upon thrones, holding sceptres)
>> A3 - flee
>> D3 - triumph
>> G3 - meet / converge
>> J3 - assault
>> A4 - discard
>> B4 - retain
>> I4 - king
>>
>> (I'm using left and right according to the traditions in western cinema,
>> where "away" is left to right and "towards" is right to left)
>>
>> Loving them, btw
>>
>> Sam Stutter
>> [email protected]
>> "No e na il cu barri"
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20 Dec 2011, at 01:28, A. Mendes wrote:
>>
>>> Happy Holidays All. Round 2 results are out. Round 3 begins.
>>>
>>> Cheers to everyone who took part.
>>>
>>>
>> http://pseudoglyphs.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/name-that-glyph-round-three/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> S A T O R
> A R E P O
> T E N E T
> O P E R A
> R O T A S
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
8. The 2011 Smiley Award Winner: Okuna
Posted by: "David Peterson" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:44 pm ((PST))
With a whole 11 days to spare, the winner of the 2011 Smiley Award is Okuna.
http://pearson.conlang.org
Matt Pearson's Okuna (formerly Tokana) has long been recognized as one of the
best examples of a naturalistic language the conlanging community has ever
seen. Matt continues to update and improve on it, and it continues to astound.
Congratulations, Matt!
You can read my full write-up of Okuna here:
http://dedalvs.com/smileys/2011.html
For more information about the Smiley, go to the main page:
http://dedalvs.com/smileys/
Just as a reminder: I'm more than happy to accept nominations for the Smiley
Award. I have a pretty good idea which languages will be near the top of my
list for the next...ten or fifteen years,
but I can't see *everything*; there are tons of languages I'm sure I've never
even heard about that are worthy of recognition. If you have any
recommendations for languages you'd like to see win the Smiley Award, send me
an e-mail (off-list, of course), and I'll add it to my list. :)
David Peterson
LCS President
[email protected]
www.conlang.org
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
9. A Series of Musings on Unusual Features
Posted by: "Logan Kearsley" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:15 pm ((PST))
I've got a little collection of conlangy thoughts that've been
percolating for a while. Consider this to be an implicit list of
AN/CADEW?-es.
Thought #1: Musings on Ad-things.
Adpositional phrases frequently behave a lot like adjective and adverb
phrases. So, how might the categories be combined?
Adpositions could be considered adjective/adverbs that happen to be
able to take complements / objects. If the language distinguishes
adjectives and adverbs morphologically, this provides an automatic
solution to disambiguating adverbial and adjectival adpositions, since
they really are just adverbs and adjectives anyway.
Adpositions could be required to occur only as the complements of
adjectives or adverbs. For situations where the adpositional phrase is
modifying the adjective or adverb, this would look a lot like English
(e.g. "green with envy"); however, wherever an adpositional phrase
modifies a noun, verb, or complete clause, a (possibly semantically
empty) adjective or adverb would be required to host the adpositional
phrase and connect it to its subject.
A variation on that idea would actually serve to make adpositions and
adjectives/adverbs more distinct: adpositions might be required to
only occur as complements, not specifically complements of adjective
or adverbs. Thus, they could attach directly to verbs or thematic
nominals when they introduce core arguments, in a case marking sort of
role, but would have to mediated by connecting adjectives or adverbs
in adjunction situations.
Thought #2: Musings on Pronouns
Pronouns can be analyzed as bare determiners that don't require
nominal complements, rather than as nominals themselves (at least in
languages where pronouns can't take additional determiners, which is
all the ones I can think of right now). But, what if they were generic
determiners that could take nominal complements? Then, e.g., your 3rd
person masculine nominal pronoun would just be the 3rd.m.nom article
with an empty nominal; the second person might be the same as a
vocative determiner. This derives from thinking about how you could
re-acquire universal case marking on English nouns by simply
juxtaposing the appropriately-cased pronouns.
Or, what if pronouns actually were just regular nominals? (This is
inspired by that Conlangery episode on the table of correlatives.)
Then you could get a nice unambiguous system for using just one word
to cover interrogatives, indefinites, and definite pronouns
distinguished by their determiners. So "who" -> "who", "a who" ->
"some/anyone", "the who" -> "he/she/it".
Going off in a different direction, lots of languages have 'unusual'
demonstratives, but how about just regular personal pronouns that
encode things like absolute location or some other physical state;
like "2ndP Climbing a Tree" vs. "2ndP on the Ground" vs. "2ndP
Indoors", or "3rdP Wet Due to Rain" vs. "3rdP Dry Oustide" vs. "3rdP
Dry Because of Being Indoors".
Thought #3: Random stuff
English double object constructions are annoying because you can't
just elide the direct object and leave the indirect object interpreted
the same way. You either have to put in a dummy object like an
indefinite pronoun, or explicitly mark the indirect object as an
oblique argument. If one goes with the dummy-object option, perhaps a
language could develop a dative case marking from cliticization and
reduction of what was originally an indefinite pronoun in a
double-object construction.
And finally- is there a reasonable way for a language to develop a
number system where the unmarked form is neither singular nor plural,
but perhaps paucal or something like that?
-l.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
10.1. Re: OT: gendered usage of "fiancé(e)" -- plus obCon lang vocabula
Posted by: "Mia Harper (Soderquist)" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:21 pm ((PST))
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Jim Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is primarily a question for married American men, but also for
> other native English speakers of both sexes and other countries. When
> you were engaged to be married, did you sometimes or often refer to
> the woman you later married as your "fiancée"? Or as your "intended"
> or "betrothed" or by some other term or circumlocution? Or simply as
> your "girlfriend"? Was there a difference in your usage re: the
> formality of the situation?
>
> My cousin has observed -- with what general validity I'm not sure --
> that in her experience women are more likely to refer to use the word
> "fiancé(e)" than men, and that men tend to continue referring to their
> intended as their "girlfriend" long after they're formally engaged.
> In particular, she criticizes the use of the word in dialogue by a
> male character who's engaged to be married to another character as
> injuring suspension of disbelief.
>
My daughter uses "fiancé" all the time. Her fiancé doesn't talk much
around me, so I have no idea what he calls her.
Although I've been married twice, I've never really been engaged, so I
haven't had a chance to see for myself how that goes. Better luck next
time.
> ObConlang: does your conlang have specific terms for "future
> wife/husband"? Are such terms gendered in their reference to persons
> of a specific gender or in how speakers of each gender use them?
> gjâ-zym-byn uses the "person who intends to become X" suffix "-zwa" to
> form a word for "bride/fiancée" {rÄ'ĵy-zwa} and another for
> "groom/fiancé" {rÄ'ĵy-θaj-zwa}. The same suffix derives words for
> "political candidate", "medical student", "catechumen", etc.
>
... I like that suffix. I might go with something that means something
similar-- perhaps less intending, more "moving toward becoming X"...
That's probably a nitpicky difference in meaning.
I am really unhappy with the Nevashi words for "husband" and "wife".
They are somehow related to "man" and "woman" at the moment, but not
in a way that I like. They are clearly from the 2007 era of Nevashi.
("Marriage" didn't enter the language until the middle of this year.)
I don't have anything for the topic of engagement at all. I think I'll
go work on that.
Mia.
Messages in this topic (36)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
11a. conlang cards
Posted by: "Patrick Dunn" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:51 pm ((PST))
I'm very much enjoying the cards I'm getting. I'm afraid, however, mine
won't be out until the end of the month. Communication between Earth and
Mi'aku is a bit sporadic for some reason right now.
(That, and I've bitten off slightly more than I can chew right now)
--
Second Person, a chapbook of poetry by Patrick Dunn, is now available for
order from Finishing Line
Press<http://www.finishinglinepress.com/NewReleasesandForthcomingTitles.htm>
and
Amazon<http://www.amazon.com/Second-Person-Patrick-Dunn/dp/1599249065/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1324342341&sr=8-2>.
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
11b. Re: conlang cards
Posted by: "Mia Harper (Soderquist)" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 6:06 pm ((PST))
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Patrick Dunn <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm very much enjoying the cards I'm getting. I'm afraid, however, mine
> won't be out until the end of the month. Communication between Earth and
> Mi'aku is a bit sporadic for some reason right now.
>
> (That, and I've bitten off slightly more than I can chew right now)
>
I am still getting mine together too. When I realized it might take me
a bit to get my act together, I decided I'd write them out as "Happy
New Year" cards. :)
Mia.
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
12. CHAT: Returned...
Posted by: "Mia Harper (Soderquist)" [email protected]
Date: Tue Dec 20, 2011 6:05 pm ((PST))
I haven't been around since July. I stayed subscribed and have
collected a bazillion emails, but I haven't been reading or posting...
until now. I am back, to whatever degree I can manage.
I should be rewriting the grammar for Teliya Nevashi. Or writing a
grammar that has the potential to make sense to other people for
ea-luna (including a few more recent revisions to how it works). Or
working on a new personal conlang I started outlining objectives for
in October. Or working on a long-promised collaborative language with
Thomas Leigh. Or writing a postmortem description of Kenakoliku. (On
that note... I may be emailing participants in that project for their
comments.) I have no shortage of conlangish stuff to do, and that
always puts me in the mood to procrastinate by reading CONLANG
instead.
Mia.
Messages in this topic (1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
