At 12:38 am +0200 22/4/02, Christian Thalmann wrote:
>--- In conlang@y..., Carlos Thompson <chlewey@C...> wrote:
>> Phonology:
>> The language has the following set of phonemes (orthography at the
>> right)
>> consonants:
>>  m  p  b  f      w  |  m p b f     w
>>  n  t  d  s  r l    |  n t d s r l
>>     c  J\ C      j  |    c j x     y
>>     k  g  x         |    k g h
>Using /x/ in an IAL might not be the best of ideas.  It's missing in
>many of the world's most-spoken languages.

Like Chinese??

If Carlos does have /h/, then there seems to me no reason not to have /x/
which could have [h] as an allophone.  IIRC both Mandarin Chinese and
Spanish /x/ have this allophonic variant.

Indeed, Esperanto managed to get a following although it has _both_ /x/ and
/h/ as separate phonemes - something I would not myself advise.

>Anyway, the pidgin grammar is definitely a good idea for an IAL.  Keep
>up the good work.

I agree.

At 8:38 pm +0200 21/4/02, Kala Tunu wrote:
>Raymond Brown <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>artificial.  By creating something that feels like a pidgin or creole, one
>can both keep the language feeling 'natural' without bringing in irregular
>features a la Occidental.
>yes, another hoaxlang with BrSc--did i write it right? and how should it
>articulate/execute it?--i feel a trend is taking on...

Sorry, I don't understand the reply.  _All_ conlangs are "hoaxlangs".

I should've thought it was pretty obvious how Interlect is articulated; as
BrSc has a limited range of consonants and all its syllables are just plane
open syllables with no consonant clusters, articulation is not exactly a

As for executing a language, whether "hoax" or not - it's normally done by
writing and speaking it.  If the language had a complicated system of
writing or was difficult to pronounce, then there might be a problem, I

I don't understand what trend either?  I see _very little_ in common
between Interlect and BrSc.

At 9:09 pm -0500 21/4/02, Danny Wier wrote:
>From: "Christian Thalmann" <[log in to unmask]>
>> Using /x/ in an IAL might not be the best of ideas.  It's missing in
>> many of the world's most-spoken languages.
>It exists in Esperanto, but isn't used very much (mainly Greek loans like
>_hxaoso_ "chaos"). Also, /x/ could have an allophone of [h]. My Trolls have
>H, but it's actually pronounced [G\] (IPA gamma) or not at all.
>I do think having both "ich-Laut" and "ach-Laut" in an IAL isn't too
>practical, however.

Now that last sentence I both understand and agree with   :)