On 30/05/2011 20:40, Padraic Brown wrote:
> --- On Sun, 5/29/11, MorphemeAddict<[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>> Padraic Brown<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> I think that to be a conlanger one must deliberately
>> create the new language or part thereof. The
>> unthinking use of language by most speakers doesn't
>> make them conlangers.
> I don't think either Ray is and I know I am not saying
> that "everyone is a conlanger" in the sense we usually
> reserve for the word (a glossopoet).

Quite right - I haven't said that. I've not anything in this
thread that suggests to me that anyone is saying that.

> What we're saying is there is not a vast nomans land
> between conlangs and natlangs.

Quite so - the dividing line between conlangs & natlangs is 
not IMO a clear cut own; there is a fuzzy dividing line at 
best. Jan, in fact, was the first to bring this up.

What seems to have prompted Stevo's remark above IIRC was my 
quoting from that "a living language ... is not constructed 
to do this", i.e. harmonize word-forms and sound-music. I 
was just intrigued that he referred to living natlangs as 
constructs. It does not, it seems to me, to imply that 
Tolkien considered all who use language to be what we term 
"conlangers" - indeed the title of the article from which 
the quote was excerpted, "A Secret Vice", surely implies 
quite the opposite!

Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.