En réponse à Greg Williams <[log in to unmask]>: > Question: > > Have any of yall created an 'a priori' language with a lot of 'a > posteriori' vocabulary (i.e., with a lot of the lexicon from natlangs) > or the reverse (an 'a posteriori' language with a lot of 'a priori' > vocabulary)? > Maggel is an example of a mix of both. It has quite a few words borrowed from natlangs (but often with some change in pronunciation and/or meaning), as well as some grammatical features consciously borrowed (but seriously twisted in the Maggelish sense ;)) ), but its core is still a priori. > I was thinking of creating a "fun" personal sort of conlang picking out > things from languages I like and adding my own stuff. I want to know if > and how often others do mixes like that. > I think it's quite frequent, even if it's not always done voluntarily :)) . Christophe. http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.