There are 16 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Indexed Predicates Sketch
From: Alex Fink
1b. Re: Indexed Predicates Sketch
From: neo gu
1c. Re: Indexed Predicates Sketch
From: neo gu
2a. Anyone there?
From: BPJ
2b. Re: Anyone there?
From: Тоłе МаьіЛеƒіљ
2c. Re: Anyone there?
From: MorphemeAddict
2d. Re: Anyone there?
From: Daniel Bowman
2e. Re: Anyone there?
From: Sam Stutter
3. Re: Blade II Language
From: Gimli G. Willikers
4a. New to the Message Board : Long-time Conlang Dicipherer
From: Gimli G. Willikers
4b. Re: New to the Message Board : Long-time Conlang Dicipherer
From: Gimli G. Willikers
4c. Re: New to the Message Board : Long-time Conlang Dicipherer
From: Tony Harris
5a. About Professional Conlangers I've Studied
From: Gimli G. Willikers
5b. Re: About Professional Conlangers I've Studied
From: MorphemeAddict
5c. Re: About Professional Conlangers I've Studied
From: Padraic Brown
5d. Re: About Professional Conlangers I've Studied
From: Padraic Brown
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Indexed Predicates Sketch
Posted by: "Alex Fink" [email protected]
Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 10:19 am ((PDT))
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 00:03:43 -0400, neo gu <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi all,
>Except for adverbs, some odds and ends that I haven't posted, and possible
>changes (especially to the tense system),
Have you considered just a completely non-inflectional, periphrastic tense
system? (Maybe the language doesn't want to be tense-prominent, as it were.)
>the basic Apr20 syntax is complete (I think). Now I'd like to see suggestions
>concerning what kind of phonology would be suitable. I've been having trouble
>coming up with satisfactory phonologies lately. Also should the
>index-linktype-plural prefixes be the same as the corresponding suffixes, or
>different (to avoid the prefix of one word being mistaken for the suffix of
>another). TIA for the help!
Okay. If I'm not mistaken, you don't usually go for lexically-determined
morphophonological variation or things like that -- and in this project, maybe
it'd obscure the big idea of having one morphological word class to have such
variation. So I guess we're gunning for one realisation of each
index-linktype-plural group.
I'm actually tempted both by the idea of making each index have one realisation
(whether prefix or suffix and whichever link type is there), allowing the
argument identities to really be manifestly visible on the surface, and making
each index have several unrelated realisations, so that there aren't odd lumpy
distributions of the index markers in sentences. Dunno.
It might be okay if the prefix of one word is mistakable for the suffix of
another. This would at worst just lead to one of these situations like, what's
it, the Salishan clitic which binds phonologically to the preceding word but
syntactically to the following one, if the forms of the affixes made the
distinction clear.
I guess one also has to have some idea how many indices there are going to be,
now.
Anyway, actual morphophonological suggestions? I have no good ideas but I've
been reading about Berber recently, so here's one idea probably coloured by
that: the (simplest) indices could just be single-consonant forms, producing
various consonant clusters; perhaps even some bases are all consonants
underlyingly, and the sequences are realized with schwa epenthesis, with the
positions of the inserted schwas serving to imply where the word boundaries
are. The (simplest) link types could be vowels, then.
Hm, maybe you could also keep prefixes and suffixes disambiguable by putting
index and link type in opposite order for them: so a full assertive word goes
C(index)-V(link)-root-V(link)-C(index).
More later if I have an actually good idea.
Alex
Messages in this topic (16)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Indexed Predicates Sketch
Posted by: "neo gu" [email protected]
Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 2:54 pm ((PDT))
On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 13:19:19 -0400, Alex Fink <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sat, 28 Apr 2012 00:03:43 -0400, neo gu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> Except for adverbs, some odds and ends that I haven't posted, and possible
>> changes (especially to the tense system),
>
> Have you considered just a completely non-inflectional, periphrastic tense
> system? (Maybe the language doesn't want to be tense-prominent, as it were.)
I think any tense for this language has to be linked, given the free word
order. I'm working on a new tense system now, involving intervals as well as
points; it may be ready for comment tomorrow.
>> the basic Apr20 syntax is complete (I think). Now I'd like to see
>> suggestions concerning what kind of phonology would be suitable. I've been
>> having trouble coming up with satisfactory phonologies lately. Also should
>> the index-linktype-plural prefixes be the same as the corresponding
>> suffixes, or different (to avoid the prefix of one word being mistaken for
>> the suffix of another). TIA for the help!
>
> Okay. If I'm not mistaken, you don't usually go for lexically-determined
> morphophonological variation or things like that -- and in this project,
> maybe it'd obscure the big idea of having one morphological word class to
> have such variation. So I guess we're gunning for one realisation of each
> index-linktype-plural group.
right
> I'm actually tempted both by the idea of making each index have one
> realisation (whether prefix or suffix and whichever link type is there),
> allowing the argument identities to really be manifestly visible on the
> surface, and making each index have several unrelated realisations, so that
> there aren't odd lumpy distributions of the index markers in sentences.
> Dunno.
same here.
> It might be okay if the prefix of one word is mistakable for the suffix of
> another. This would at worst just lead to one of these situations like,
> what's it, the Salishan clitic which binds phonologically to the preceding
> word but syntactically to the following one, if the forms of the affixes made
> the distinction clear.
>
> I guess one also has to have some idea how many indices there are going to
> be, now.
I've used as many as 4 in a fairly simple sentence; I'm thinking 6 may be
enough; a couple indexes will be redefinable within the same sentence.
> Anyway, actual morphophonological suggestions? I have no good ideas but I've
> been reading about Berber recently, so here's one idea probably coloured by
> that: the (simplest) indices could just be single-consonant forms, producing
> various consonant clusters; perhaps even some bases are all consonants
> underlyingly, and the sequences are realized with schwa epenthesis, with the
> positions of the inserted schwas serving to imply where the word boundaries
> are. The (simplest) link types could be vowels, then.
I'll play around with that.
> Hm, maybe you could also keep prefixes and suffixes disambiguable by putting
> index and link type in opposite order for them: so a full assertive word goes
> C(index)-V(link)-root-V(link)-C(index).
That's something to look at too.
> More later if I have an actually good idea.
>
> Alex
Messages in this topic (16)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Indexed Predicates Sketch
Posted by: "neo gu" [email protected]
Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 10:15 pm ((PDT))
This is the new tense system. It involves temporal intervals as well as
temporal points of reference and supercedes what was previously posted about
tense.
Predicates inheriting points are imperfective while those inheriting intervals
are perfective. The indexes used for intervals are c, d, e ... described as
c = [c0, c1] (I'm not sure about the notation.)
The index o is predefined as the absolute present point. The indexes a and b
are predefined as the absolute future and absolute past intervals,
respectively, described as:
a = [o, +infinity]
b = [-infinity, o]
The interval of the action x is asserted as being a subrange of the inherited
interval:
x0 not less than c0 and x1 not greater than c1
Each temporal operator synthesizes an interval from the inherited interval and
the time of the predicate's action. For inherited interval [c0, c1] and action
interval [x0, x1]:
A = [x1, c1]
B = [c0, x0]
W = [x0, x1]
Temporal adverbs, such as "yesterday" also synthesize intervals.
Now for the morphology. Inherited indexes are prefixed (c-) while synthesized
indexes are suffixed (-d). So far, operators are also suffixed:
cat-j Tom-i Dj-b-see-Di.
"Tom has seen the cat."
yesterday-c c-leave-Ad-Dj John-j d-eat-Di Mary-i.
"Yesterday after John left, Mary ate."
The interval of "leave" is within that of interval c, "yesterday". The operator
A modifies c producing interval d such that the starting time of d is the
finishing time of the interval of "leave". The finishing time of d is that of c
so that the scope of "yesterday" still applies to "eat".
In the absence of an explicitly inherited index, restricted predicates and
secondary predicates inherit both the hosts inherited index and its action
interval.
John-i UPj-o-eat-Di stale-j pancake-j.
"John is eating stale pancakes."
The explicitly inherited index is absolute present, which is included in the
interval of "eat". The interval of "stale" is a superrange of that of "eat",
which is inherited implicitly via index j.
John-j Di-b-sit-Dj chair-i i-B-break.
"John sat on the broken chair."
The interval of "sit" is a subrange of [-infinity, o]; this is inherited via i
by "break". It's then modified by B producing the interval for "break": the
starting time is -ì and the finishing time is the starting time for "sit".
Tom-i Mary-j b-eat-Wc-Di c-call-Di.
"While Mary was eating, Tom called."
The interval of "eat" is a subrange of [-infinity, o]; that of "call" is a
subrange of the interval of "eat".
The interval of a depictive secondary predicate is a superrange of that of its
host predicate's.
John-i meat-j Dj-b-eat-Di raw-Dj.
"John ate the meat raw."
The interval of "eat" is a subrange of [-infinity, o] and also one of "raw".
The starting time of a resultative secondary predicate is the ending time of
the host's action.
Dj-c-put-1 Dk-in-Dj closet-j yesterday-c.
"I put it in the closet yesterday."
The interval of "put" is within that of "yesterday". The starting time of "in"
is the finishing time of "put".
I'm not sure I've covered everything ....
--
neogu
Messages in this topic (16)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Anyone there?
Posted by: "BPJ" [email protected]
Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:45 am ((PDT))
Is the list silent today, or is it me who ain't getting the mails?
/bpj
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: Anyone there?
Posted by: "Тоłе МаьіЛеƒіљ" [email protected]
Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:50 am ((PDT))
On 28.04.2012 20:45, BPJ wrote:
> Is the list silent today, or is it me who ain't getting the mails?
>
> /bpj
Well, that explains it.
--
Тоłе МаьіЛеƒіљ МаьіПаніљ
Δебјані ҩнІљте Ьлеј
http://illte.conlang.org/ http://delang.conlang.org/
___
«Панемі ƒłе δеьлеј ҩнδеьомеłс» - анƕомі
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
2c. Re: Anyone there?
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" [email protected]
Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 12:40 pm ((PDT))
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Тоłе МаьіЛеƒіљ МаьіПаніљ <
[email protected]> wrote:
> On 28.04.2012 20:45, BPJ wrote:
>
>> Is the list silent today, or is it me who ain't getting the mails?
>>
>> /bpj
>>
>
> Well, that explains it.
Explains what? The last post I received before BPJ's was marked 12:03 am,
over 15 hours ago.
stevo
>
>
> --
> Тоłе МаьіЛеƒіљ МаьіПаніљ
>
> Δебјані ҩнІљте Ьлеј
> http://illte.conlang.org/ http://delang.conlang.org/
> ___
> «Панемі ƒłе δеьлеј ҩнδеьомеłс» - анƕомі
>
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
2d. Re: Anyone there?
Posted by: "Daniel Bowman" [email protected]
Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 12:50 pm ((PDT))
I've been getting mail off and on all day.
2012/4/28 MorphemeAddict <[email protected]>
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Тоłе МаьіЛеƒіљ МаьіПаніљ <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On 28.04.2012 20:45, BPJ wrote:
> >
> >> Is the list silent today, or is it me who ain't getting the mails?
> >>
> >> /bpj
> >>
> >
> > Well, that explains it.
>
>
> Explains what? The last post I received before BPJ's was marked 12:03 am,
> over 15 hours ago.
>
> stevo
>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Тоłе МаьіЛеƒіљ МаьіПаніљ
> >
> > Δебјані ҩнІљте Ьлеј
> > http://illte.conlang.org/ http://delang.conlang.org/
> > ___
> > «Панемі ƒłе δеьлеј ҩнδеьомеłс» - анƕомі
> >
>
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
2e. Re: Anyone there?
Posted by: "Sam Stutter" [email protected]
Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 1:27 pm ((PDT))
Prior to the original message from BPJ at 19:45 BST I had got a message from
Alex at 18:19 BST, and several through the day :-/
Sam Stutter
[email protected]
"No e na'l cu barri"
On 28 Apr 2012, at 20:49, Daniel Bowman <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've been getting mail off and on all day.
>
> 2012/4/28 MorphemeAddict <[email protected]>
>
>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Тоłе МаьіЛеƒіљ МаьіПаніљ <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 28.04.2012 20:45, BPJ wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is the list silent today, or is it me who ain't getting the mails?
>>>>
>>>> /bpj
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, that explains it.
>>
>>
>> Explains what? The last post I received before BPJ's was marked 12:03 am,
>> over 15 hours ago.
>>
>> stevo
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Тоłе МаьіЛеƒіљ МаьіПаніљ
>>>
>>> Δебјані ҩнІљте Ьлеј
>>> http://illte.conlang.org/ http://delang.conlang.org/
>>> ___
>>> «Панемі ƒłе δеьлеј ҩнδеьомеłс» - анƕомі
>>>
>>
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. Re: Blade II Language
Posted by: "Gimli G. Willikers" [email protected]
Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 3:43 am ((PDT))
So I just looked up that Ann lady and she's a Czech scriptwriter. My guess is
they just got her to speak Czech, then credited her for "Vampiric language" or
whatever. And is anyone surprised ? Compared to Blade, it was always seemed
much lower-budget to me, though I never saw even Blade until I a few years ago.
It was too gory and demonic for me (I'm a traditional Catholic), but I thought
the language aspects were handled exceptionally well - perhaps one of the best
treatments of all cinematic history. They diciphered the ancient text using a
computer program - and the script was based on Oracle Bone Script, which was a
joy. Otherwise, I thought it was creative and pretty good. I had a
Collector's DVD and I thought the original "Ghostbusters" treatment of La Magra
as a amorphous Lovecraftian giant composed of globules of blood (sounds cool,
even, huh?) would have been much better, but that's Hollywood, "goons in suits"
as the Simpsons put it.
I would have never borrowed the movie from the dormitory video library had it
not had that language in it.
I made a collection today of materials on the internet on the "Vampire
language" from Blade, and I'm going to put them on my Scribd and wePaper
accounts with 6-12 months. I might make a dictionary, but maybe not.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. New to the Message Board : Long-time Conlang Dicipherer
Posted by: "Gimli G. Willikers" [email protected]
Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 3:49 am ((PDT))
Hey ! My first post here ! Can someone explain to me what this message board
is all about - I mean, in relationship to Zompist Bboard and other conlanging
message boards ? What are they all ? I've been conlanging for 5 years now but
I don't get on the internet often and there's no where this stuff is explained.
It used to seem to me that Zompist was the go-to board for everything. Is it ?
I'm the guy who did the majority of the dicipherment work for Atlantean from
Atlantis : The Lost Empire, starting in 2006. I remember coming to this group
to gather the threads on it when it came out. I never posted because I was
busy, something drew me to Zompist instead, maybe wikipedia or someone. My
works is at Google "Atlantean language institute" and Scribd or wePapers
"Sumerian corpus".
I'm also the first (maybe only, it also totally bombed) guy who has attempted
to dicipher Frommer's Martian from John Carter (2012). I haven't put it online
yet, maybe in a week. Martian was much better than Avatar language. It was
also a much better movie, but I'm a traditional Catholic and think adultery is
retarded. It was better than Star Wars !
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: New to the Message Board : Long-time Conlang Dicipherer
Posted by: "Gimli G. Willikers" [email protected]
Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:22 am ((PDT))
For once, the main characters got married in the first film, instead of putting
it off forever, just to milk the audience for money:
Star Wars
Indiana Jones (awful)
James Bond (worst of all ; never saw)
Spider-man
(and the comics were the worst, even killing a fiance to keep it going)
One of the reasons I gave up on fiction years ago was that it's just
thoughtless psychological manipulation - they don't want to teach you wisdom or
how to live a happy life, it's just about tapping your hopes and dreams, so
they can make money off you like you're human cattle. It's consumerism meets
education - they teach you how to be a perpetual wanter, never a haver. People
like that are criminals. But I like conlangs as something people can make for
themselves and others - primarily as exercises in linguistic theory and grammar
- reality is much more useful and fulfilling than fantasy.
Another thing we see a lot of in conlanging is that outsider think we learn
them and make them instead of learning "useful languages", which, not
coincidently, they themselves don't learn. Does this need explanation ?
Conlangs are the fastest route to language, learning, the training-wheels of
metalinguistic realization. Of course, to people for whom learning languages
is impossible, learning a made-up language seems backwards and stupid - a
telling reflection of their own condition. Not learning languages is dangerous
- but government have always encouraged it as a way of controling people - but
it always backfires. Understanding and appreciating cultures - something
polyglottery assists with - won't prevent wars - that's being a Good Catholic -
but it's part of what a society needs to have peace. And if done in sufficient
dosages, it leads to being a Good Catholic, to the discovery of the 2,000 year
history of Catholicism and the reality of the Saints' and IESVS' miracles, of
the Catholic God's reaching out to humanity.
One of the problems with Chompsky's school is that it restricts linguists from
studying ancient documents and challenging philosophy, then examining the
evidence. It's not wholelistic, it's not useful. It traps linguists in the
present, and usually in their country or in the West - it traps them from
finding - and examining - the viewpoints of other peoples, other times.
Chompsky and his ilk want us to use linguistics to be robots - we are only
rewarded if faceless theory is our only output. But the smarter people of the
society will be held accountable by God for their misuse of their talents and
the co-occuring abuse of their fellow man.
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
4c. Re: New to the Message Board : Long-time Conlang Dicipherer
Posted by: "Tony Harris" [email protected]
Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:13 am ((PDT))
Welcome. I think, based on your assorted posts, my first comment on the
difference between the ZBB and the Conlang list is that this is a more
civil and polite group, one where we share our questions and our works
but don't beat our chests and shout about how much better we and our
works are. We may not agree on things, but we do try to disagree
respectfully.
As for the languages you cite, I think it's also important to remember
that neither Okrand nor Frommer have total control over the publishing
and sharing of their Klingon, Atlantean, Na'vi, or even Barsoomian
materials. These works were all done to give depth to films, and as
such the studios retain some or all rights to what happens with the
languages. Likewise the languages couldn't be too complex or difficult
to pronounce as they had to be spoken with some semblance of reality by
actors who aren't into languages.
Personally I've been conlanging for over 35 years now, and come to
realize there are many, many reasons for taking up this hobby, and many,
many varieties of languages that may seem wonderful to one person and
not so wonderful to another. The good thing about this list is that it
recognizes, and respects, that diversity.
On 04/29/2012 06:39 AM, Gimli G. Willikers wrote:
> Hey ! My first post here ! Can someone explain to me what this message
> board is all about - I mean, in relationship to Zompist Bboard and other
> conlanging message boards ? What are they all ? I've been conlanging for 5
> years now but I don't get on the internet often and there's no where this
> stuff is explained.
>
> It used to seem to me that Zompist was the go-to board for everything. Is it
> ?
>
> I'm the guy who did the majority of the dicipherment work for Atlantean from
> Atlantis : The Lost Empire, starting in 2006. I remember coming to this
> group to gather the threads on it when it came out. I never posted because I
> was busy, something drew me to Zompist instead, maybe wikipedia or someone.
> My works is at Google "Atlantean language institute" and Scribd or wePapers
> "Sumerian corpus".
>
> I'm also the first (maybe only, it also totally bombed) guy who has attempted
> to dicipher Frommer's Martian from John Carter (2012). I haven't put it
> online yet, maybe in a week. Martian was much better than Avatar language.
> It was also a much better movie, but I'm a traditional Catholic and think
> adultery is retarded. It was better than Star Wars !
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. About Professional Conlangers I've Studied
Posted by: "Gimli G. Willikers" [email protected]
Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:04 am ((PDT))
Here's what I know:
(Background : I did most of the dicipherment work on 2001 Atlantean, did all
thus far on Frommer's Martian 2012, and have a BA in Linguistics with a focus
on absolutely everything - starting in about 2001, when I started studying not
languages - too hard - but writing systems (languages came in 2006.)
Frommer is no conlanger, but neither was Okrand. Their heart wasn't in it like
the guys I've seen on Zompist. Okrand refused to do anything - anything - on
Atlantean because "no one is interested in it", making me and handful of people
"no body" in Okrand's checking book. But this, sigh, is the academic
mentality, at least regarding anything with a popular appeal.
So I deciphered it and developed it without his help.
Frommer has a blog and keeps in contact with his dicipherers, but he still
forces them to dicipher his rediculously amateur and over-complicated conlangs
- I did nothing on Avatar, but saw its dicipherment and was appalled - did he
know anything about conlanging before he made Na'vi ?
Both of them made up horrible orthographies : px for [p'] instead of pp, and
Okrand's I and G and whatever - capital letters. Atlantean fixed all of
Klingon's problems, but very few people seem to have seem my work. And my
specialty is writing systems - and Klingon alphabet and Martian alphabet are
terrible - they aren't even a priori, Klingon is based on Phoenician and
Martian was based on Atlantean and upper-case Roman.
I actually developed a hieroglyphic writing system for Klingon which I have yet
to put online. It wasn't hard, you just need to know how all hieroglyphic
writing systems work and have some experience with them - which I guess is
rare, thanks to atheist nihilist jerks like Chompsky. (I really think the
mainstream school of linguistics is retarded; my school is closer to the old
West Coast school.)
These guys in Hollywood are goons. I don't think their movies are good enough
to have conlangs, but even then they could get guys who care and aren't just in
it for the money.
So I'm sending a message by translating all of John Carter into Martian. For
free. How's that for a standard ?
When I read you guys talk about getting paid to conlang, I'm shocked. You
realize that hardly anyone would pay to read a book I would write on Hittite
Hieroglyphic ? But would some kid read it if I put it online for free ? Yes,
he would. In 2001, I read the entire Ancient Scripts.Com and I looked up at
the Ivory Tower and wondered why they didn't give a hoot about guys like me.
Real science, real scientists, are dedicated to finding the truth and sharing
it with others. Conlangs may not be real languages, but they are the #1 way to
learn any language, English included, and to learn linguistics. And I want to
help other people out so much, that I'm willing to produce tomes - search
Scribd and wePapers for "Sumerian corpus" - on dead languages and linguistic
topics so I can reach people who can't afford a $50 or $150 "ABC Etymological
Dictionary of Old Chinese" -
people like me when I was 14.
people like all the people I've met teaching English in China and Cambodia and
the Philippines.
People who aren't lucky enough to be born in America or even have working
internet most of the time, people who don't live in our world, but would learn
if learning was more accessible.
That's how I use my talents. Dudes like Okrand can sell their books, dudes
like Frommer can make us do the work for him, but that's not how it should be
done.
Here's a thought I recently had - if conlangers want good conlangs in the
movies, they need to put them out there - like on Scribd or a website - for
free. Label them generically, like "Arabic-sounding villain language", "smooth
and flowing alien language", "Chinese-sounding hero's language" or something,
then attach to them instructions so simple that movie-makers could use them. I
realize this would involve making really simple conlangs, but it would probably
work, and it would get things going. Give them vocabularies of 5,000-10,000
words, so you could find some word if you wanted to. Conlangs like this could
even give you credit if they were used after your death, like a Picasso or a
Rembrandt. It could event be a cipher for English, but it would be better than
nothing. Conlangs can be - and should be - much simpler than German or French
- or Xhosa. But presentation counts for a lot.
What is Chat OT Theory and Usage ? That's too complicated. What is OT ? Why
can't it be like Zompist, transparent ?
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
5b. Re: About Professional Conlangers I've Studied
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" [email protected]
Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:26 am ((PDT))
Wow. Evangelical conlanging.
stevo
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Gimli G. Willikers <[email protected]>wrote:
> Here's what I know:
>
> (Background : I did most of the dicipherment work on 2001 Atlantean, did
> all thus far on Frommer's Martian 2012, and have a BA in Linguistics with a
> focus on absolutely everything - starting in about 2001, when I started
> studying not languages - too hard - but writing systems (languages came in
> 2006.)
>
> Frommer is no conlanger, but neither was Okrand. Their heart wasn't in it
> like the guys I've seen on Zompist. Okrand refused to do anything -
> anything - on Atlantean because "no one is interested in it", making me and
> handful of people "no body" in Okrand's checking book. But this, sigh, is
> the academic mentality, at least regarding anything with a popular appeal.
>
> So I deciphered it and developed it without his help.
>
> Frommer has a blog and keeps in contact with his dicipherers, but he still
> forces them to dicipher his rediculously amateur and over-complicated
> conlangs - I did nothing on Avatar, but saw its dicipherment and was
> appalled - did he know anything about conlanging before he made Na'vi ?
>
> Both of them made up horrible orthographies : px for [p'] instead of pp,
> and Okrand's I and G and whatever - capital letters. Atlantean fixed all
> of Klingon's problems, but very few people seem to have seem my work. And
> my specialty is writing systems - and Klingon alphabet and Martian alphabet
> are terrible - they aren't even a priori, Klingon is based on Phoenician
> and Martian was based on Atlantean and upper-case Roman.
>
> I actually developed a hieroglyphic writing system for Klingon which I
> have yet to put online. It wasn't hard, you just need to know how all
> hieroglyphic writing systems work and have some experience with them -
> which I guess is rare, thanks to atheist nihilist jerks like Chompsky. (I
> really think the mainstream school of linguistics is retarded; my school is
> closer to the old West Coast school.)
>
> These guys in Hollywood are goons. I don't think their movies are good
> enough to have conlangs, but even then they could get guys who care and
> aren't just in it for the money.
>
> So I'm sending a message by translating all of John Carter into Martian.
> For free. How's that for a standard ?
>
> When I read you guys talk about getting paid to conlang, I'm shocked. You
> realize that hardly anyone would pay to read a book I would write on
> Hittite Hieroglyphic ? But would some kid read it if I put it online for
> free ? Yes, he would. In 2001, I read the entire Ancient Scripts.Com and
> I looked up at the Ivory Tower and wondered why they didn't give a hoot
> about guys like me.
>
> Real science, real scientists, are dedicated to finding the truth and
> sharing it with others. Conlangs may not be real languages, but they are
> the #1 way to learn any language, English included, and to learn
> linguistics. And I want to help other people out so much, that I'm willing
> to produce tomes - search Scribd and wePapers for "Sumerian corpus" - on
> dead languages and linguistic topics so I can reach people who can't afford
> a $50 or $150 "ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese" -
>
> people like me when I was 14.
>
> people like all the people I've met teaching English in China and Cambodia
> and the Philippines.
>
> People who aren't lucky enough to be born in America or even have working
> internet most of the time, people who don't live in our world, but would
> learn if learning was more accessible.
>
> That's how I use my talents. Dudes like Okrand can sell their books,
> dudes like Frommer can make us do the work for him, but that's not how it
> should be done.
>
> Here's a thought I recently had - if conlangers want good conlangs in the
> movies, they need to put them out there - like on Scribd or a website - for
> free. Label them generically, like "Arabic-sounding villain language",
> "smooth and flowing alien language", "Chinese-sounding hero's language" or
> something, then attach to them instructions so simple that movie-makers
> could use them. I realize this would involve making really simple
> conlangs, but it would probably work, and it would get things going. Give
> them vocabularies of 5,000-10,000 words, so you could find some word if you
> wanted to. Conlangs like this could even give you credit if they were used
> after your death, like a Picasso or a Rembrandt. It could event be a
> cipher for English, but it would be better than nothing. Conlangs can be -
> and should be - much simpler than German or French - or Xhosa. But
> presentation counts for a lot.
>
> What is Chat OT Theory and Usage ? That's too complicated. What is OT ?
> Why can't it be like Zompist, transparent ?
>
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
5c. Re: About Professional Conlangers I've Studied
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:24 am ((PDT))
--- On Sun, 4/29/12, MorphemeAddict <[email protected]> wrote:
> Wow. Evangelical conlanging.
Truly! He'll get the hang of things around here by and by. Leastways, once
he understands that a) this ìsn't Zompist and b) what's transparent or
common practice on one forum is not immediately translatable to the other
forum.
Oh, and c) don't know what they do on Zompist, but I do know we don't take
all that kindly to attacking fellow conlangers (Okrand et al) just because
we don't like what they've done or the way they've done it. Nor do we
generally attack what they've done, even if we don't like it. You know,
comes in here and within his first two posts to the group has trashed two
conlangs and hasn't even shown us his own!
First impressions, wot?
Padraic
>
> stevo
>
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Gimli G. Willikers <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > Here's what I know:
> >
> > (Background : I did most of the dicipherment work on
> 2001 Atlantean, did
> > all thus far on Frommer's Martian 2012, and have a BA
> in Linguistics with a
> > focus on absolutely everything - starting in about
> 2001, when I started
> > studying not languages - too hard - but writing systems
> (languages came in
> > 2006.)
> >
> > Frommer is no conlanger, but neither was Okrand.
> Their heart wasn't in it
> > like the guys I've seen on Zompist. Okrand
> refused to do anything -
> > anything - on Atlantean because "no one is interested
> in it", making me and
> > handful of people "no body" in Okrand's checking
> book. But this, sigh, is
> > the academic mentality, at least regarding anything
> with a popular appeal.
> >
> > So I deciphered it and developed it without his help.
> >
> > Frommer has a blog and keeps in contact with his
> dicipherers, but he still
> > forces them to dicipher his rediculously amateur and
> over-complicated
> > conlangs - I did nothing on Avatar, but saw its
> dicipherment and was
> > appalled - did he know anything about conlanging before
> he made Na'vi ?
> >
> > Both of them made up horrible orthographies : px for
> [p'] instead of pp,
> > and Okrand's I and G and whatever - capital
> letters. Atlantean fixed all
> > of Klingon's problems, but very few people seem to have
> seem my work. And
> > my specialty is writing systems - and Klingon alphabet
> and Martian alphabet
> > are terrible - they aren't even a priori, Klingon is
> based on Phoenician
> > and Martian was based on Atlantean and upper-case
> Roman.
> >
> > I actually developed a hieroglyphic writing system for
> Klingon which I
> > have yet to put online. It wasn't hard, you just
> need to know how all
> > hieroglyphic writing systems work and have some
> experience with them -
> > which I guess is rare, thanks to atheist nihilist jerks
> like Chompsky. (I
> > really think the mainstream school of linguistics is
> retarded; my school is
> > closer to the old West Coast school.)
> >
> > These guys in Hollywood are goons. I don't think
> their movies are good
> > enough to have conlangs, but even then they could get
> guys who care and
> > aren't just in it for the money.
> >
> > So I'm sending a message by translating all of John
> Carter into Martian.
> > For free. How's that for a standard ?
> >
> > When I read you guys talk about getting paid to
> conlang, I'm shocked. You
> > realize that hardly anyone would pay to read a book I
> would write on
> > Hittite Hieroglyphic ? But would some kid read it
> if I put it online for
> > free ? Yes, he would. In 2001, I read the
> entire Ancient Scripts.Com and
> > I looked up at the Ivory Tower and wondered why they
> didn't give a hoot
> > about guys like me.
> >
> > Real science, real scientists, are dedicated to finding
> the truth and
> > sharing it with others. Conlangs may not be real
> languages, but they are
> > the #1 way to learn any language, English included, and
> to learn
> > linguistics. And I want to help other people out
> so much, that I'm willing
> > to produce tomes - search Scribd and wePapers for
> "Sumerian corpus" - on
> > dead languages and linguistic topics so I can reach
> people who can't afford
> > a $50 or $150 "ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old
> Chinese" -
> >
> > people like me when I was 14.
> >
> > people like all the people I've met teaching English in
> China and Cambodia
> > and the Philippines.
> >
> > People who aren't lucky enough to be born in America or
> even have working
> > internet most of the time, people who don't live in our
> world, but would
> > learn if learning was more accessible.
> >
> > That's how I use my talents. Dudes like Okrand
> can sell their books,
> > dudes like Frommer can make us do the work for him, but
> that's not how it
> > should be done.
> >
> > Here's a thought I recently had - if conlangers want
> good conlangs in the
> > movies, they need to put them out there - like on
> Scribd or a website - for
> > free. Label them generically, like
> "Arabic-sounding villain language",
> > "smooth and flowing alien language", "Chinese-sounding
> hero's language" or
> > something, then attach to them instructions so simple
> that movie-makers
> > could use them. I realize this would involve
> making really simple
> > conlangs, but it would probably work, and it would get
> things going. Give
> > them vocabularies of 5,000-10,000 words, so you could
> find some word if you
> > wanted to. Conlangs like this could even give you
> credit if they were used
> > after your death, like a Picasso or a Rembrandt.
> It could event be a
> > cipher for English, but it would be better than
> nothing. Conlangs can be -
> > and should be - much simpler than German or French - or
> Xhosa. But
> > presentation counts for a lot.
> >
> > What is Chat OT Theory and Usage ? That's too
> complicated. What is OT ?
> > Why can't it be like Zompist, transparent ?
> >
>
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
5d. Re: About Professional Conlangers I've Studied
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:55 am ((PDT))
--- On Sun, 4/29/12, Gimli G. Willikers <[email protected]> wrote:
> Frommer is no conlanger, but neither was Okrand. Their
> heart wasn't in it like the guys I've seen on Zompist.
> Okrand refused to do anything - anything - on Atlantean
> because "no one is interested in it", making me and handful
> of people "no body" in Okrand's checking book. But
> this, sigh, is the academic mentality, at least regarding
> anything with a popular appeal.
I wonder why that might be...
> So I deciphered it and developed it without his help.
>
> Frommer has a blog and keeps in contact with his
> dicipherers, but he still forces them to dicipher his
> rediculously amateur and over-complicated conlangs - I did
> nothing on Avatar, but saw its dicipherment and was appalled
> - did he know anything about conlanging before he made Na'vi?
Just as a heads-up: I don't know what they do over on Zompist, and perhaps
you are unaware that you're no longer in Zompistan anymore, but we don't
take all that well to folks, especially in their first couple posts to
Conlang, who needlessly attack fellow conlangers and their creations.
First impressions, you know. Right now, my first impression of you is some
immature idiot who thinks he knows everything and who is just APD enough to
not give a feck and presents himself like some arrogant teenager who has
just bumbled into a room of adults he doesn't know and doesn't quite know
how to act and must resort to the know-it-better-than-all-of-you-combined
teenage schtick. Sorry, that doesn't work here. Feel free to back out of
the room, come in again with humbler heart and learn some manners.
[rest snipped]
> What is Chat OT Theory and Usage? That's too complicated.
Well, jolly well use your superior intellect and sort it out!
> What is OT? Why can't it be like Zompist, transparent?
If what I've seen in your present post is a typical representative of what
goes in in Zompistan, I can tell you with all candor that I wouldn't want
this place to be any more like Zompist!
moni t' feaire ridieir a lis chraves amb-chez ta mbeckseiure!
Padraic
Messages in this topic (4)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
