Print

Print


 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of steve rice

> One of the points in favor of an English-based creole
> is simplifying the phonology. There was a project
> early last century called the Glan-ik (so far as I
> know, on this list only Paul Bartlett and I know about
> it) that was a great artlang. It had a full complement
> of vowels, etc., so I wouldn't want to pursue it as an
> auxlang. (It would be easier than regular English,
> though, and the phonology is slightly simpler.) If
> Dana had more time he might find it interesting.
> 
> But the point of interest is that the Glan-ik was
> supposed to be a trade language: a way to simplify
> English specifically for use with people who need
> international contact but can't manage regular
> English. It's a good idea; it just needs tweaking in a
> truly creolish direction--the Glan-ik came out before
> creolistics had gone very far.

This isn't what I think it is, is it?  I had run across a language
(don't remember the name right now) which was based on English, but
the morphemes were segregated to make the language completely
isolating, even the derivational affixes were broken apart so you
had words like "er" and ISTR even "s" (plural marker).  Sometimes
it's hard to remember them all after looking over so many conlangs.