Print

Print


On 7/3/07, Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> See, I've never gotten attached to a lang because I've never really
> been *happy* with any of my langs.  I have an idea, I flesh it out, I
> decide the result is boring or ugly or, usually,  both, I get
> discouraged and stop conlanging for a couple years, I get a new idea,
> and the cycle repeats....


Some time ago I was at my grandma's garden (how bucolic ; ) ) and saw an
'avenca' /a.'veN.ka/ (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Adiantumraddianum1web.jpg) there. That
word suddenly sounded so (so!) right I thought about creating a language
just for harmonizing with it. Maybe it's a way to go...  pick a word and
start from it, not even a 'inspirational language'... just squeeze a word ;
).

The only thing my conlanging has produced that I'm remotely fond of is
> my script for Okaikiar.  But that's tied to a phonology I find too
> restrictive (having only 7 consonants) and a language I don't even
> like the name of...


I chased for your script... just found bits of it on archive.org. Do you
have any sample of it somewhere (to show : ) )? Funny that my yet only
script is geometric also... my problem is that I have many more phonemes
than letters, but, diacritics are for that! Anyway... how likely is to have
a script created to write on stone with diacritics? I think not much...

I'm not depressed or anything, btw. :) Just explaining why I haven't
> developed any of my langs very far, or really posted anything actually
> about conlanging in a while.


Surely anyone but me will remember ; ) a conlang created without revision,
just addition. I seems so right! If the phonology is not right, just cook a
descendant from it. If the problem is on syntax... well... every kind of
grass I saw growing in syntax, there is no problem sowing or reaping some.
But... as for me I came in despair with relative clauses a while ago... now
I'm at the phonology again ; )). Two years... alas.

Edgard.

On 7/3/07, Edgard Bikelis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > On 7/2/07, David J. Peterson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >
>
> --
> Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]>
>