On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 01:42:27AM +0100, J?rg Rhiemeier wrote:
> terminology, judging by the word-lists I have seen on the Net.  The
> language gave rise to an occult tradition of "Enochian magick", and it
> is perhaps the reason why some Christian fundamentalists look upon
> conlanging with such vile disgust.  Personally, I find the Enochian

Well, I'm a devout Christian, and I don't see what's wrong with
conlanging, except perhaps taking up way too much of my time ;-)

But to me, a language is a language -- what it's used for is another
matter totally. I've seen occult things expressed in ancient Greek for the
foreign-ness value, I suppose. But that in no way makes ancient Greek a
"vile" language :-)

> language interesting (*as a conlang*, that is, I have no business with
> any kind of magick and occultism!!!) and worth exploring; reconstructing
> its grammar, if there is one, would be a challenge!

It does sound interesting, esp. the part about words appearing in
different forms depending on the context. I'd love to know if it has any
innovative grammatical features :-)


2+2=4. 2*2=4. 2^2=4. Therefore, +, *, and ^ are the same operation.