There are 15 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
From: Adam Walker
1b. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
From: Garth Wallace
1c. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
From: Jennifer Collins-Jai
1d. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
From: Elena ``of Valhalla''
1e. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
From: Allison Swenson
2. Proto-Jardic noun morphology
From: Herman Miller
3a. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
From: MorphemeAddict
4a. Conlang the Movie
From: Matthew A. Gurevitch
4b. Re: Conlang the Movie
From: Logan Kearsley
4c. Re: Conlang the Movie
From: Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews
4d. Re: Conlang the Movie
From: Logan Kearsley
4e. Re: Conlang the Movie
From: Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews
4f. Re: Conlang the Movie
From: Tony Harris
5. Arabic/Persian transliteration (was related to Sim-Arabic)
From: MorphemeAddict
6a. Re: vowels: five to three?
From: Douglas Koller
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
Posted by: "Adam Walker" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 8:22 pm ((PST))
That's probably because they actually care about vocabulary and such
things as make an actual language. Too many, IMHO far too many, male
conlangers never do anything but fiddle with grammers and syntactic
alignments and all the geegaws under the hood and never get around to
creating anything useable. Let alone lived in.
Adam
On 2/11/13, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
> For my money, quality trumps quantity, and it's my humble opinion (as
> a male conlanger) that female conlangers have created some
> significantly better conlangs. (Don't ask me to explain my criteria.
> This is just my gut reaction: "Women's conlangs are, as a rule, better
> conlangs.")
>
> --gary
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Sai <[email protected]> wrote:
>> See discussion in comments @
>> https://plus.google.com/103112149634414554669/posts/hQxeizKUaLS for
>> some starters.
>>
>> Also, where are the results of the previous Lunatic Surveys I tried
>> looking for them to grab the gender ratio stat but couldn't find it.
>> :-/
>>
>> - Sai
>
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
Posted by: "Garth Wallace" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 9:05 pm ((PST))
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Adam Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
> That's probably because they actually care about vocabulary and such
> things as make an actual language. Too many, IMHO far too many, male
> conlangers never do anything but fiddle with grammers and syntactic
> alignments and all the geegaws under the hood and never get around to
> creating anything useable. Let alone lived in.
*raises hand* Guilty as charged.
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
Posted by: "Jennifer Collins-Jai" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 9:09 pm ((PST))
It does perplex me though. The ratio of guys to girls in Linguistics at my
school is probably 1:70. No joke. I know not all conlangers are linguists,
but more females seem to be learning it. Our Linguistics club's
excectutives are all female as well. Interesting fact though!
Jennifer (Jai)
On Feb 11, 2013 11:22 PM, "Adam Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
> That's probably because they actually care about vocabulary and such
> things as make an actual language. Too many, IMHO far too many, male
> conlangers never do anything but fiddle with grammers and syntactic
> alignments and all the geegaws under the hood and never get around to
> creating anything useable. Let alone lived in.
>
> Adam
>
> On 2/11/13, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
> > For my money, quality trumps quantity, and it's my humble opinion (as
> > a male conlanger) that female conlangers have created some
> > significantly better conlangs. (Don't ask me to explain my criteria.
> > This is just my gut reaction: "Women's conlangs are, as a rule, better
> > conlangs.")
> >
> > --gary
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Sai <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> See discussion in comments @
> >> https://plus.google.com/103112149634414554669/posts/hQxeizKUaLS for
> >> some starters.
> >>
> >> Also, where are the results of the previous Lunatic Surveys I tried
> >> looking for them to grab the gender ratio stat but couldn't find it.
> >> :-/
> >>
> >> - Sai
> >
>
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
1d. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
Posted by: "Elena ``of Valhalla''" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 12, 2013 1:08 am ((PST))
Could it be that conlanging is a geeky endeavour, and that society
still puts quite a pressure on females to avoid geekdom and focus
on social activities?
Personally, I'm also quite self-counscious on how bad my conlangs
are, but considering that they are mostly conworlding-driven
I'm not even that interested receiving suggestion on how
to improve them, so they will remain unpublished.
If it's not just me and this is something that other women do,
it could explain why female conlangers publish better conlangs.
--
Elena ``of Valhalla'' - who is also interested in writing free
software, playing RPGs and other geeky stuff that proper females
aren't supposed to do, so why not a bit of conlanging? :D
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
1e. Re: Why are there fewer female than male conlangers?
Posted by: "Allison Swenson" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 12, 2013 6:03 am ((PST))
I'm not sure of the stats in regards to conlanging, but in the linguistics
classes I've taken at university, they've been overwhelmingly dominated by
women--my current class has two men and perhaps twenty-five women, and my
last one had about three men and thirty women. I think it's mostly because
the majority of people taking the classes are going into some form of
education (either teaching English (the subject) or ESL), and education
programs do tend to be dominated by women.
Conlanging is a bit of a different beast than simply learning about
linguistics, I suppose. I wonder if the fact that more "nerdy" things have
conlangs (Star Trek, Lord of the Rings, etc.) nudges it toward the male
side of the spectrum? Not that women don't get involved in such things,
it's just that more men than women tend to be big fans, so they'd have more
exposure to conlangs in the first place.
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Jennifer Collins-Jai <
[email protected]> wrote:
> It does perplex me though. The ratio of guys to girls in Linguistics at my
> school is probably 1:70. No joke. I know not all conlangers are linguists,
> but more females seem to be learning it. Our Linguistics club's
> excectutives are all female as well. Interesting fact though!
>
> Jennifer (Jai)
> On Feb 11, 2013 11:22 PM, "Adam Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > That's probably because they actually care about vocabulary and such
> > things as make an actual language. Too many, IMHO far too many, male
> > conlangers never do anything but fiddle with grammers and syntactic
> > alignments and all the geegaws under the hood and never get around to
> > creating anything useable. Let alone lived in.
> >
> > Adam
> >
> > On 2/11/13, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > For my money, quality trumps quantity, and it's my humble opinion (as
> > > a male conlanger) that female conlangers have created some
> > > significantly better conlangs. (Don't ask me to explain my criteria.
> > > This is just my gut reaction: "Women's conlangs are, as a rule, better
> > > conlangs.")
> > >
> > > --gary
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Sai <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> See discussion in comments @
> > >> https://plus.google.com/103112149634414554669/posts/hQxeizKUaLS for
> > >> some starters.
> > >>
> > >> Also, where are the results of the previous Lunatic Surveys I tried
> > >> looking for them to grab the gender ratio stat but couldn't find it.
> > >> :-/
> > >>
> > >> - Sai
> > >
> >
>
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. Proto-Jardic noun morphology
Posted by: "Herman Miller" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 8:30 pm ((PST))
I've pretty much settled on final vowels being lost between Proto-Jardic
and modern Jarda (e.g., *nosi > noś, *kuḍa > kóṛ). But many noun
inflections in Jarda end in a vowel. One of two things must have
happened: either a consonant was lost (/ɣ/ is one option), or only short
vowels were lost while diphthongs were reduced to short vowels.
Take the animate ablative suffix -lü for example: it could have been
*-lui in Proto-Jardic.
*teige-lui > tig-lü
*kiṭal-lui > ķitṛa-lü
So far so good. But the inanimate ablative suffix is -öl after
consonants and -l after vowels, and it's -ol after consonants and -l
after vowels for abstract nouns. This starts to get tricky.
*siaḍu-ile > śaṛ-öl
*zakiğ-ile > zaķi-l ?
*vieze-elu > véz-ol
*guleviğ-elu > gulvi-l ?
Here's the whole set of noun suffixes in Jarda:
animate inanimate abstract
ergative tig-ṛa ķitṛa-ṛa* śaṛ-ka zaķi-ka véz-ma gulvi-ma
absolutive tig-Ø ķitṛa-Ø śaṛ-Ø zaķi-Ø véz-Ø gulvi-Ø
ablative tig-lü ķitṛa-lü śaṛ-öl zaķi-l véz-ol gulvi-l
dative tig-na ķitṛa-n śaṛ-in zaķi-n véz-na gulvi-n
instrumental tig-ta ķitṛa-ta śaṛ-ŏt zaķi-ŏt véz-ta gulvi-ta
genitive tig-i ķitṛa-i śaṛ-é zaķi-é véz-a gulvi-ja
locative tig-vi ķitṛa-vi śaṛ-vö zaķi-vö véz-vo gulvi-vo
*actually ķitṛa-la, a slightly irregular form ... one reason I've
reconstructed the Proto-Jardic word with a final -l.
I think I'll end up coming up with a set of suffixes that makes sense in
Proto-Jardic, and assume that analogical leveling regularized the
endings by the time it got to modern Jarda. Or I might just scrap the
modern Jarda endings and see what would make more sense coming from
Proto-Jardic.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: OT YAEPT -omp, -onk
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 9:03 pm ((PST))
Using comp, pomp, stomp, swamp - all FATHER.
Using bonk, conch, donkey, honk, honky-tonk, zonk - all CAUGHT, (but monk,
monkey like DRUNK)
I guess I'm group 4.
stevo
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:48 PM, And Rosta <[email protected]> wrote:
> A question about ONLY people who rhyme FATHER & BOTHER but distinguish COT
> from CAUGHT:
>
> I. Which of the following statements is truest:
>
> In words spelt <-omp> and <-onk>
> (1) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words
> (2) Everyone with the accent described above has the CAUGHT vowel in all
> such words
> (3) Everyone with the accent described above has the FATHER vowel in all
> such words or has the CAUGHT vowel in all such words
> (4) Some speakers have the FATHER vowel in some such words and the CAUGHT
> vowel in other such words.
>
> II. If you don't know which is truest, which type (1/2/3/4) are you?
>
>
> --And.
>
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Conlang the Movie
Posted by: "Matthew A. Gurevitch" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 9:19 pm ((PST))
Dear Conlang-L,
I know I am a few years late to ask about it, but would anyone happen to know
where I could try and get a copy of Conlang the Movie? The website is not up,
and I cannot find any way of contacting the creators. Thank you for your help.
All my best,
Matthew Gurevitch
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: Conlang the Movie
Posted by: "Logan Kearsley" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 9:36 pm ((PST))
On 11 February 2013 22:19, Matthew A. Gurevitch <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Conlang-L,
>
> I know I am a few years late to ask about it, but would anyone happen to
> know where I could try and get a copy of Conlang the Movie? The website is
> not up, and I cannot find any way of contacting the creators. Thank you for
> your help.
You could try twitter: https://twitter.com/MartaAMasferrer
Not exactly a prolific tweeter, but that's the best contact info I
could find. There's a Marta Masferrer on LinkedIn, too, but I couldn't
verify that it was definitely the same person.
-l.
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4c. Re: Conlang the Movie
Posted by: "Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:31 pm ((PST))
There's a movie?What's it about?
-----Original Message-----
From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Logan Kearsley
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 9:36 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Conlang the Movie
On 11 February 2013 22:19, Matthew A. Gurevitch <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Conlang-L,
>
> I know I am a few years late to ask about it, but would anyone happen to
> know where I could try and get a copy of Conlang the Movie? The website is
> not up, and I cannot find any way of contacting the creators. Thank you for
> your help.
You could try twitter: https://twitter.com/MartaAMasferrer
Not exactly a prolific tweeter, but that's the best contact info I
could find. There's a Marta Masferrer on LinkedIn, too, but I couldn't
verify that it was definitely the same person.
-l.
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4d. Re: Conlang the Movie
Posted by: "Logan Kearsley" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:39 pm ((PST))
On 12 February 2013 02:31, Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews
<[email protected]> wrote:
> There's a movie?What's it about?
It's a 20-minute short film about college-student conlanging club. It
involves a humorous series of challenges to determine the rightful
president of the conlanging club, all while our hero does not yet
realize that his crush loves him back.
Hey, if that were real life, there'd be another entry on the list of
conlanging couples!
-l.
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4e. Re: Conlang the Movie
Posted by: "Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:56 pm ((PST))
Cool!
-----Original Message-----
From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Logan Kearsley
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 10:40 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Conlang the Movie
On 12 February 2013 02:31, Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews
<[email protected]> wrote:
> There's a movie?What's it about?
It's a 20-minute short film about college-student conlanging club. It
involves a humorous series of challenges to determine the rightful
president of the conlanging club, all while our hero does not yet
realize that his crush loves him back.
Hey, if that were real life, there'd be another entry on the list of
conlanging couples!
-l.
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4f. Re: Conlang the Movie
Posted by: "Tony Harris" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 12, 2013 2:55 am ((PST))
I think Marta Masferrer, one of the creators, might be on this list, but
just in case I will message her your email via Facebook and let her know
your question.
On 02/12/2013 12:19 AM, Matthew A. Gurevitch wrote:
> Dear Conlang-L,
>
> I know I am a few years late to ask about it, but would anyone happen to
> know where I could try and get a copy of Conlang the Movie? The website is
> not up, and I cannot find any way of contacting the creators. Thank you for
> your help.
>
> All my best,
> Matthew Gurevitch
>
>
>
>
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. Arabic/Persian transliteration (was related to Sim-Arabic)
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" [email protected]
Date: Mon Feb 11, 2013 9:58 pm ((PST))
On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 11:07 AM, MorphemeAddict <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> In my own transliteration system for Arabic and Persian, I use upper and
> lower case letters, no diacritics or digraphs.
>
> stevo
>
>>
>> My transliteration system for Arabic/Persian is based on the form of the
letters more than the sound, although sound still plays a big role in the
choice of letter. Here is the abjad in Arabic order, with the Persian
letters at the end.
e b t T d D r R x H j s S c C z Z Q G f q k l m n h w y p X J g
The main feature is that dotted versions are the uppercase version of the
undotted letter, with the exception of Q/G and b/t/T/y/Y. I recently tried
using 'g' for ayin so that it would follow the basic pattern, but I don't
like it very well, mostly because using K for Persian g just feels wrong.
:) The biggest problem I can see is using R for /z/, but the simplicity of
the system overrides that problem. And r and z are often associated with
each other (cf. Dutch vriezen (freeze) - pp. gevroren (frozen)).
Using uppercase letters distinct from lowercase may not look nice, but it's
efficient and effective. And you get used to it over time. Klingon is the
typical example of such usage, but the MdC (Manuel de Codage} used for
Middle Egyptian is another common example.
Vowels are a, i, u when written, otherwise omitted.
'e' with wavy line above is E.
Final 'h' with two dots is A.
Nunation is the vowel plus N.
The circle for no vowel is =.
The symbol for double consonant is 2.
'y' with no dots is Y.
Hamza alone is ". Hamza above a carrier is ' after the carrier. Hamza below
a carrier is I.
This also works for Urdu, where I use tz, dz, and rz for the retroflex t,
d, and r. I chose 'z' for the digraph because that's what is done in Urdu:
the letter I write as z is written over the t, d, or r.
Sometimes I experiment with 9 for alif and 6 for ayin (especially in
Hebrew), but I prefer not to mix digits with letters.
stevo
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6a. Re: vowels: five to three?
Posted by: "Douglas Koller" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 12, 2013 4:12 am ((PST))
> Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 09:36:04 -0200
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: vowels: five to three?
> To: [email protected]
> Au, saule miu!
> Ma n�atu saule
> cchi� bellu, ai ne�
> �au saule miu
> sta nfraunte a ti!�
> au saule
> �au saule miu
> sta nfraunte a ti,
> sta nfraunte a ti!
Sung to the tune of "Tsa na u niva"?
Kou
Messages in this topic (19)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
