This is the most exciting part of conlanging!!!

What you will find is that everyone of us has our own methods and
philosophy for conlanging and it has a lot to do with our purpose for
constructing in the first place! Since I am a linguist at heart and do not
delve into AUs or worlds of my own creation, I tend to have a very
mechanical way of approaching language.

Since you have the phonology, orthography, some grammar and vocabulary, I
would naturally go about making sentences. I always attempt to make
sentences with varying levels of complexity and this way you can identify
areas that need improvement.

Here are some example sentences I worked with for my first conlang Visah.

This is a house.
This is an old house.
This is the house.
This is the old house.
This is one of the old houses.
This house is the oldest house on the street.
This old house is her house.
This is her old house.
I live in her old house.
Her mother gave her this old house.

Then to focus on grammar, I changed the sentences to reflect different

I eat chicken.
I ate chicken.
I used to eat chicken.
I was eating chicken.
I have eaten chicken.

You get the idea until I have compiled every possible way to denote certain
tenses, I continue to complicate the sentences. Now, this is the fun part
for me because you get to look at things you may not have thought of like
classifiers, direct and indirect object pronouns, noun clauses. I always
pay a great deal attention to turns of phrases in our language. For
instance, when I was creating my second conlang, I focused a great deal on
nominalizing verbs, a feature my first language did not have because I was
not exposed to that linguistic feature at that point.

After you play with sentences and create a full grammar, the vocabulary
will pretty much make itself!

Just remember, as you learn more and progress in your own idea of what your
language should sound like and be capable of expressing, your language will
change. It will change constantly and you may even end up contradicting
yourself at certain points, which is natural!

Essence D. Jones
[log in to unmask]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Padraic Brown <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Anonymous wrote:
> > I am relatively new to Conlanging, so I would appreciate some advice.
> > I am in the process of making my first Conlang based on a fictional
> world that I created some years ago.
> > I have thus far been following the model from "" (
> > I have categorised my phonology and morphology. I am currently using a
> Roman and Devanagari orthographic system with diacritics as well as some
> > Norse and Greek figures, such as:  ð, þ, Ø and Φ. Also made are the
> grammatical cases, affixes, effective affixes and a very small lexicon.
> > Would anyone have any advice as to how I might continue construction?
> > A methodical plan of attack?
> > Where to go next?
> <delurk>
> Much will depend on your philosophy, your own ideas on what conlanging
> actually is. You're a beginner, so you may or may not have thought about
> this much. Me, my take is that glossopoesy is first and foremost Art. A
> conlang exists to open the eyes (and ears!) to  a new and wonderful
> consideration of what is; to open a new door into Faerie; to reveal what
> was previously and hitherto unrevealed. A conlang must tell a story, and
> that story is of the people that speak it and the world they live in. So
> ask yourself first, who are these people that speak this language? What
> kind of world do they live in? It could be *here* -- the primary world. It
> could be *elsewhere* -- some otherworld. I skimmed over the LCK you linked
> to, and I think it presents a backward method. It starts you out on
> phonology, when you don't even know who's talking this language, what their
> history or their religion or their mythology is. Those are the things I
> would start with, and only worry about phonology later. But you've already
> done some of that, so no worries there. Now might be a good time to explore
> the who and the where!
> As for methodical planning, I can only speak to how I would go about it.
> Again, it will be a matter of your own take on construction methodology.
> Mine happens to be one of *language discovery* rather than language
> construction. So I tend to start a new conlang with a story -- and see what
> comes of it. For me, the language is already there. It's just waiting for
> me to learn it and reveal it as I go. It's like a block of marble --
> there's *already a beautiful statue of a nymph in there* -- tis just a
> matter of chipping away the bits. Starting out with a story can seem
> daunting, especially if you don't have a lot of vocabulary; but I find this
> is a great way to quickly learn about the culture of the language's
> speakers and a great way to build a strong lexicon.
> Where to go next is, of course, second star to the right and straight on
> til morning! Just dive in among your language and its people and find out
> all you can about them -- learn what they like to eat, how they pray, what
> games they play, what they look like, what sort of houses they live in.
> (Remember, Prof. Tolkien started us out this way too: "In a hole in the
> ground there lived a hobbit. Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the
> ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, sandy hole with
> nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a hobbit-hole, and that
> means comfort.") All of these things will not only inform your conlang, but
> considering these cultural things will lead you to the natural questions
> "what do they call these things?" and "How do they talk about these things?"
> Many folks recommend against beginning with poetry or other hard kinds of
> language. I recommend the contrary: start with poetry! Write a recipe or a
> prayer or a snatch of song or a chapter of your people's foundational myth.
> But this is only one way to conlang. Others may share it, but not
> everyone. If you stay here long enough, you will find other people have
> their own ways. And there are also many kinds of conlang one can make.
> You've recently seen references to auxlangs and engelangs and loglangs. I
> make artlangs, artistic, impressionistic conlangs. Some people prefer to
> make model conlangs (a conlang that closely mimics a natural language in
> its socio-historical context); others prefer entirely allohistorical
> settings. These are things you'll eventually want to try out, too. You may
> end up preferring one of these other forms of conlang over another. I
> mention that I liken my method to "discovery". Other folks prefer a method
> more akin to architecture -- they like to design and arrange blocks, devise
> detailed plans and put them all together according to the Plan.
> So long as the result is beautiful and so long as it reveals what was once
> hidden, it's all wonderful!
> So, I guess to answer your actual question: your next step is to figure
> out what your next step ought to be!
> <relurk>