Hallo conlangers!

On 06.06.2016 09:09, R A Brown wrote:

> The bogolangs are so designated because they are bogus.  If
> Vulgar Latin had remained in Britain and developed into a
> modern Romance language, it would not be VL with Welsh
> diachronic development and certainly not VL with English
> diachronic development!

Right - "bogolangs" are indeed bogus. That grafting sound changes of one 
language onto another language does not work easily because of the 
different phonology is only part of the problem. Once you change the 
linguistic landscape of a country (e.g., by replacing Latin with Greek, 
or Celtic with Latin) you *substantially change its further linguistic 
history*, and one would not expect the same changes to happen to the 
language despite it being an entirely different one!

... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
"Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1