LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CONLANG Archives


CONLANG Archives

CONLANG Archives


CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CONLANG Home

CONLANG Home

CONLANG  September 2014, Week 1

CONLANG September 2014, Week 1

Subject:

Re: De-Lurking in preparation for autumn

From:

Pete Bleackley <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Constructed Languages List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 4 Sep 2014 09:31:45 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

If one of my artistic goals is, "The language sounds like it's spoken by synaesthetes," that's too subjective to be measurable. But if I get feedback like "'silpe' sounds like an otter looks," I know that I've at least partially achieved it.

Pete Bleackley
The Fantastical Devices of Pete The Mad Scientist - http://fantasticaldevices.blogspot.com

-----Original Message-----
From: And Rosta <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 9:24
Subject: Re: De-Lurking in preparation for autumn

But if the declaration of relatively measurable design goals is part of the
presentation of the language then that turns it into an engelang. If you
simply present to me your bare conlang without a specification of its
design goals, then it comes to me as an artlang unless I infer a set of
measurable design goals and thereby treat it as an engelang. Conversely if
you present to me your conlang replete with specification of a relatively
measurable design goal, such as (maximal) naturalism, then it comes to me
as an engelang.

--And.
On 3 Sep 2014 19:02, "Pete Bleackley" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I disagree that an artlang can't fail - there are all sorts of things that
> can go wrong. Maybe it's not convincing as a naturalistic language. Maybe
> the creator set an artistic goal they couldn't realise. Maybe it ended up
> as a naive relex of English. Maybe, from a phonaesthetic point of view,
> it's just plain ugly. Maybe it has two grammatical features that appealed
> to the creator individually, but just won't work together.
>
> Pete Bleackley
> The Fantastical Devices of Pete The Mad Scientist -
> http://fantasticaldevices.blogspot.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: And Rosta <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 8:22
> Subject: Re: De-Lurking in preparation for autumn
>
> Jeffrey Brown, On 02/09/2014 16:50:
> > If you think that by using your approach you will be able to
> > demonstrate conclusively that you have created a minimal grammar in
> > an objectively measurable sense, you may be disappointed at the
> > lackluster response from fellow conlanger and linguists. If you think
> > that you will end up with a language with a simple grammar that you
> > enjoyed creating and speaking and writing, the response will be more
> > positive. Just my opinion.
>
> I don't agree with it. You're counselling declaring the project an artlang
> rather than an engelang in order to obviate the (in this instance, high)
> risk of failure, since by definition an engelang can succeed and fail and
> an artlang can't. But it is precisely this, the possibility of success, and
> of learning both from success and from failure, that makes the engelang
> approach of greater interest. It's true that response to the engelang is
> likely to be critical -- as is typically and naturally the case in
> enterprises within the domain of science and philosophy -- but such
> response is still positive: to point out failure is not to maintain the
> enterprise should not have been undertaken in the first place or is of no
> value.
>
> Finding a way to measure rule complexity is an unsolved problem (afaik) so
> is worth working on. But as I have said to Patrik, finding the simplest
> possible grammar is a mostly solved problem, and an engelang that sets
> itself this goal without considering what is already known is likely to
> reinvent the wheel and to reinvent an inferior wheel to the one we already
> have.
>
> --And.
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Error during command authentication.

Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=111). The server is probably not started.

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager