As it happens I gave an interview about conlangs, conlanging and Tolkien's
conlangs for local cable TV last week. They asked questions and I answered
for more than half an hour before I realized that they hadn't realized that
there are people who make conlangs as a hobby in its own right rather than
just authors who cunstruct conlangs as part of their fiction writing or
lingusts who get hired to conlang for the entertainment industry, and
people who are fans of such languages. Perhaps they thought that too weird
to be thinkable! ;-) In the end they only used two quotes; one comparing
artlangs to model trains saying that just like the latter are very similar
to real trains but are smaller and have no passengers, artlangs are very
similar to natlangs but are less fleshed out in vocabulary and often also
in grammar and lacking native speakers. The second was about conlanging
being an art and not needing have a utilitarian value or purpose any more
than any other work of art. they cut out my remark about there being a
market for this kind of art in recent years. I also talked about different
kinds of conlangs and the Gnoli Triangle (without confusing them by naming
it and using the Swedish equivalents of "art", "auxiliary" and
"experimental" language, but they used none of that. In addition they had a
university linguist in the studio who got a chance to compare conlangs
antagonistically to "all the wonderful natural languages". Thus only a
partial success and quite a bit of a failure.

Those of you who understand Swedish (or are curious what I look and sound
like -- average overexucated nerd in fact! ;-) can go to <>, follow the web-tv link and look for a
programme called "Alla pratar". It's half an hour and I appear towards the
end interspersed with pictures of Tolkien, Martin and Star Trek books.

At least I now know what kind of content to put on the <> domain,
which I control. :-)

/bpj -- posting from gmail because I'm away from the desktop. In bed with a
fever (which is somewhat receding) in fact.

Den söndagen den 16:e december 2012 skrev Daniel Prohaska:

> You're absolutely right. Linguistic theories are often misrepresented by
> popular journalism.
> Dan
> On Dec 16, 2012, at 2:17 PM, taliesin the storyteller wrote:
> > On 12/15/2012 06:15 PM, Sai wrote:
> >> Original article:
> >>
> >
> > I've known about that article for some weeks. I sure wish there was a
> proper paper or book from the authors instead of the popularized
> journalist-touched blah that is Apollon. It's impossible to know what the
> authors actually said when a journalist has been involved :/
> >
> >
> > t.