Print

Print


I was not discussing Dustinger's proposal in any very specific sense -- perhaps not at all. Many conlangs and especially artlangs exist in fictional worlds or times. But linguistic creativity takes many forms, some hard to classify.

For example, was Boontling a conlang by the definition we commonly use? 

A rural community conlang? Is that possible?

If so, that's rare, but how rare in the ancient past?

Regards,          LEO


-----Original Message-----
From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of R A Brown
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 11:17 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Language revivals and magic (was: Constructed Jewish Languages)

On 30/08/2014 17:33, Leo Moser wrote:
> Leo responds: I don't like to disagree with Ray, I seldom find 
> anything he says about conlanging other than very wise.
>
> However, Ray said (of the idea that Modern Ivrit is a
> conlang)
>> But IMO this use of "conlang" is controversial, not helpful and is 
>> surely not what Dustinger had in mind.
>
> I agree it is "controversial," and not "what Dustinger had in mind."

Good.

> But we must at times enter controversial areas in our fiction. Even 
> Harry Potter outraged some who felt it favored witches. All magic is 
> surely controversial.

Yes, but what has magic to do with the 'Constructed Jewish Language' thread?  In the email that began this thread Dustinger wrote:
"I had the idea to make Judeo-Hungarian as an exercise in adstratum influences ..."

I see no hint of magic there, just an exercise in language creation.  Unless I've missed something, as far as I can see, Dustinger's proposal has no more to do with magic than my Britainese does.

Melissa's 'Oral Language', of course, has very much to do with magic.  But I took no part in that thread - partly because I did not understand all the emails, and partly because 'magic stones' (or magic anything) hold no interest for me.

> Moreover, I do think looking at such things as Sanskrit,  Ivrit, or 
> Cornish can be "helpful" in some ways.

Sure, looking at _any_ language can indeed be helpful.
Looking at the ways extinct languages are revived (without
magic) can be helpful.

What I meant is revival of the argument we had not so long ago on this list about whether such revivals, reconstructed langs like PIE and, indeed, the standard literary form of a natlang are "conlangs."  Jan Van Steenbergen takes a very wide view of what constitutes a conlang:
http://steen.free.fr/classificatie.html

I take a narrower view:
http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Glosso/Glossopoeia.html#conlangs

IIRC we agreed to differ.

I think it's fair to say that on this list we generally understand 'conlang' to mean an artlang, an engelang or an auxlang.  Tho we may discuss the last of these
linguistically, we leave their promotion to that Other List   ;)

> I wonder if there have been any constructed worlds in which "dead" 
> languages were revived.

Surely, there must be since such languages have been revived
*here.*

--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"Ein Kopf, der auf seine eigene Kosten denkt, wird immer Eingriffe in die Sprache thun."
[J.G. Hamann, 1760]
"A mind that thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language".