Talk:Constructed language/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Conlangs Conference / Colloquium - April/May 2006

I am currently organizing a conlangs conference, to be held at UC Berkeley in late April / early May.

Please see http://www.livejournal.com/~ucb_lcs for more info - including the call for speakers / attendees and the preregistration form. More information will be posted to that first URL as I know it, and emailed to people who've sent me their prereg.

I'm not sure where/how to list this on the main Conlangs entry (and portal) - since this is more a 'current event' or 'invite' than regular entry info. I'd appreciate it if someone did so for me (IJzeren Jan?).

Thanks, and see y'all there!

--Sai Emrys 06:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge?

A while back, it has been proposed that we merge Fictional language with List of fictional languages. Until now, only three people have given their opinion, one against the merger, two in favour. Some more input on Talk:List of fictional languages would be appreciated. ----IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 09:26, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Language template

Conlanguine
Created by	The Pasta Chef
Setting and usage	language for describing everyday events in terms of pasta shapes
Users	3
Purpose	constructed language based on pasta
Language codes
ISO 639-3	–

I thought I would let those interested in conlangs know that {{language}} has been adapted for better use in conlang articles. See a silly example to the right. There is some extra flexibility built into the template, which can be seen in other language articles. I'm still working on it, so I would welcome some feedback on how to make this more conlang friendly. The benefit, I believe, in having this template on an article about a conlang is that it ties the style in with that of natural languages, and thus might add some extra respectability. --Gareth Hughes 13:36, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

now {{{Infobox Language}}} Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:28, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

It is excellent, Gareth. My compliments! It took me a while before I really understood how to use it (this is really advanced template building, wow!), but I got it now, and I have already added it to a few conlangs.

Feedback. Well, there are two things I can think of. Minor qualms, really.

First of all, it might deserve recommendation to create a special box for the year in which a language was created. Not a big deal, really, since it can as well be added after the name of the author. But if it's possible to have a separate box, that would be fine.

Secondly, classification. For the languages I have "done", I follow the following classification scheme:

• constructed language
  • artistic language
    • fictional language
    • alternative language
    • micronational language
    • personal language
    • one more I can't remember right now
  • international auxiliary language
  • engineered language
    • logical language
    • philosophical language
    • ...

But, there is also another important criterion for classification: the source of (most of the) vocabulary and grammar. The a priori vs. a posteriori distinction. And in the case of a posteriori languages, the question if a language is Romance, Slavic, etc. As you can see in Brithenig, Wenedyk, Verdurian and a few others, I've solved that for now by adding some text between brackets; but perhaps, a separate infobox would be better.

Just my 2p. --IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 14:48, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback, Jan. Creating a separate field for the year of creation should be fairly straightforward. Up until now, I've added the year of creation in brackets after the creator's name. If it feels right, I'll see if I can place the year field on the same line, but in a separate column (I know there's a spare column there already).

You could use your classification scheme with the template quite easily. It is set up so that you can use subsequent parameters named fam1, fam2 and so forth to create a hierarchy. The parameter fam1 will default to read "constructed language" if it's left out. At the moment, the hierarchy will always close with the name of the language itself boldened.

Your comment about the multiple descent of a posteriori conlangs is fascinating: many draw inspiration from natural languages. I might have to set up a sub-template, which is called by a new parameter, to display this information. I'll have a think about this one.

I was a little concerned about two other fields for conlangs. Firstly, I'm not sure how appropriate the speakers field is: perhaps we should simply try to find the details. Many conlangs do not have any reasonable estimate as to their number of speakers. I wonder if this field should be made optional, or replaced with another. The other field I'm concerned about is nation. This only appears if agency is defined (which only really happens for the IALs). However, no conlang is the official language of an actual state, and it seems inappropriate to use this field for internal/adherent's organisations. As this is mostly IAL specific, I would like some suggestions as to how this field might be better used for them. --Gareth Hughes 17:26, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

As for the year field, it's really no big deal. The year behind the author's name works fine, too. It was merely a suggestion.

I noticed the fam2, fam3 templates too (I also tried fam4, but that didn't work). They work fine, and the family offers an acceptable alternative when something doesn't work out. The only thing, like I said, is that there are basically two ways to categorise conlangs: by purpose (artistic, fictional, auxiliary, etc.) and by vocabulary source. Folkspraak, Slovio and Interlingua are all auxlangs, but you wouldn't do justice to them by simply categorising them as such, without mentioning that they are Germanic-based, Slavic-based and Romance-based respectively. So yes, I think there should definitely be a second "family" field, containing "a priori/a posteriori/mixed" in the first line, and an eventual language family, or even a particular language (Basic English!) in the second.

As for the nation field: I agree that it's not appropriate for conlangs, even auxlangs. Would it be possible to build in a condition that it pops up when agency is defined AND when the language is not a constructed language? Or, if that's too complicated, simply turn it into an optional field? --IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 20:24, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

OK, I've added {{{date}}} to {{language}}. If you want to add the date of creation of a conlang to a separate field, simply add |date=1907, or whatever. I'm surprised that fam4 didn't work: you do need to have every level before that present (except fam1, which has a default) for it to work. Take a look at Maori, for a lot of fams! I'll keep working on the other ideas. --Gareth Hughes 21:10, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Fine, it works! :) I don't know what happened to fam4; perhaps it was just me doing something wrong. Oh, and I forget to address the issue of no. of speakers: indeed, it doesn't really matter for artistic and fictional languages (in most cases the number would be either 0 or 1). But for auxlangs it matters a lot, even though it's pretty hard to get accurate info (even the creator of the language himself won't probably). So I'd say, let it stay, even though in many cases the answer would be something like "estimated between 50 and 200" or so. --IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 21:56, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

I've implemented the suggestions. The genetic classification field now reads a priori classification. It is still filled using either family or fams. To add in a posteriori inspiration, use the parameter posteriori. The IALs that have official regulating bodies, now have a simplified 'official status' section. --Gareth Hughes 13:35, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Um, no, that's not exactly what I meant. You may have misunderstood my point regarding a priori/a posteriori. The artistic/auxiliary/engineered distinction deals basically with the purpose for which the language was designed, while the a priori/a posteriori distinction deals with the source of (the bulk of) the vocabulary). I was rather thinking along the following lines. To give you two examples (on for the a priori language Klingon, one for my own Wenedyk):

Category (purpose)	constructed languages  artistic languages   fictional languages    Klingon
Category (vocabulary source)	constructed languages  a priori languages

Category (purpose)	constructed languages  artistic languages   alternative languages    Wenedyk
Category (vocabulary source)	constructed languages  a posteriori languages (hypothetical Romance language based on Polish)

In other words, my suggestion would be that you substitute the title of the family resp. the fam1/fam2/etc. box with "category (purpose)" or somesuch, and that you change the name of the posteriori box to "category (vocabulary source)". Or something similar. The second box might have "a priori" as a default value, so that in the case of a posteriori languages the box would need to be filled with info. --IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 14:35, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, I've switched to the headings you suggested. Have I got it right now? --Gareth Hughes 17:15, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Excellent! Yes, it's all correct now. This new version has also the advantage that it doesn't render the places where it has already been implemented incorrect. Well done, and many thanks! You can see the result of your work already at Lojban, Klingon, Brithenig and Wenedyk. When I have the time, I'll use it for all conlangs. --IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 20:50, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, there's one thing I noticed that I'm unsure about: all pages using the template are automatically categorised as "pages that contain IPA", even though in 95% of the cases they don't. I'm not sure if that's really a problem or if there's any way to go about that differently. But somehow I feel that categorision would better be brought in manually. Or, say, by using a parameter "IPA|yes/no" or something. Thoughts? --IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 09:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Forget it, I hadn't noticed the notice=nonotice feature. My bad. --IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 09:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

It's there by default because linguist-types (I suppose I include myself) feel that any decent article on a language should include a modicum of IPA. As you discovered, the nonotice option is there to turn the default notice off. I suppose the conversation over at template talk:language was all about getting editors to use IPA in all language articles. I hope you're enjoying the template. --Gareth Hughes 14:57, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Very much, thank you again. Today on wikipedia.nl I've proposed adopting it wholesale (well, and translating it of course)... Cheers, --IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 16:34, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I suppose that you've met Mark Dingemanse, African-languages specialist. He might give you a hand over on nl. --Gareth Hughes 16:49, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Constructed languages

As the header suggests, JonMoore and I have finally created a WikiProject Constructed languages. We discussed the possibilities, the pros and the contras of it before, but now we finally have it. Everybody who is interested is sincerely invited to join! —IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 22:15, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Slightly OT: Conlangs flag & Berkeley class

If I'm out of line posting this here, let me know, but AFAIK I'm not. So, two items that may be of interest to people watching this. (I've posted about this elsewhere - eg LJ Conlangs and the CONLANG list - but I know not everyone watches those who watches here.)

1. I'm assembling a bulk order of Conlangs flags. That's the one designed on CONLANG - [1]. They will be 3'x5' grommeted screenprinted 1-side/1-ply knitted polyester. The price is dependent on # ordered; at present I have 9 people signed up for one. My quotes are $53 per for 6 orders, $31.25 for 12, and $18.50 for 36. Plus $8.50 shipping worldwide. I'm not making any money off it, and I'm not handling the actual shipping and payment - those'll be done direct with the vendor - I'm just coordinating this into a single order and making sure everyone's paying the same. If you want one, email me - conlangs@saizai (I'm a dotcom, yay) - with your name, email, and your max price. Deadline is 18 January 2006.

2. I'm doing the Conlangs DE-Cal (LJ website) at Berkeley again this year. Will try to make all videos published online again and freely available - last year's are on videos.google.com and archive.org (though about half - and the better half, too, since I do learn over time - are missing due to a massive hard drive failure :-/). It'll be more hands-on and a less lecturey / less heavy workload class than last year's, and judging by response so far it may turn out to be a rather large class. Will know more about that once I have a semi-confirmed enrollment figure, in a month or so.

Hope that's useful. --Sai Emrys 14:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Regularized or prescriptive?

Rycanada (talk • contribs) has changed "regularized grammar" to "prescriptive grammar". I believe this is not the same idea. A regularized grammar (as I've always understood the term) is a grammar that has made regular, either by design from scratch or by removing irregularities from a natural language. A prescriptive grammar need not be regularized (actually it would be regulated). --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 17:06, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Merger from naturalistic planned language

There has been a merger tag on Naturalistic planned language for a long time. Would anyone here care to comment on/action the proposal as I don't know the subject well enough to offer a useful input. Kcordina 14:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, and I also dug up its inevitable counterpart, Schematic planned language. Yes, I think these should be merged into Constructed language (as per ancient VfD). Give me a few days, and I'll take care of it. —IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 18:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I've moved both babies into international auxiliary language, which on second though is where they belong, rather than in constructed language. —IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 21:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Top work, well done! Kcordina ^Talk 08:56, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

VfDs and VfUs

• The following AFDs are currently open: Siberian language (2nd time).
• The following AFDs were recently concluded resulting in delete: Kaytrin, Esata (2nd time).
• The following AFDs were recently concluded resulting in merge and redirect: D'Armond Speers.
• The following AFDs were recently concluded resulting in keep: High Icelandic, Wenedyk (2nd time)
• The following AFDs were recently concluded resulting in no consensus: Talossan (2nd time)

--IJzeren Jan 08:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC) (upd. 05:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC))

Portal

For those who haven't noticed it yet: we have a very nice new Portal:Constructed languages! ----IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 10:31, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

What Makes a Romance Conlang?

If a conlang is inspired form Classical Latin(i.e. not Vulgar Latin), can it be called a "Romance" conlang? Frosty 22:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Theoretically not, of course. However, there are two reasons why we usually don't make the distinction. First of all, it is not very relevant in our context. And more importantly perhaps, it's not really clear to make a distinction between CL and VL anyway. Look at a language like Sardinian: it shares many features with CL that other Romance languages don't, but it still counts as "Romance".

There is also a practical issue: everybody with a minimum amount of interest in these matters has one or more Latin dictionaries at home, and these always refer to CL only. Vulgar Latin, on the other hand, is quite poorly documented. Even those who do their very best creating a language based on VL are likely to end up with a few classicisms as well. —IJzeren Jan _{In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij} 17:53, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Modern Hebrew

The article assumes Modern hebrew is a Constructed language, while it's more like a Creole language. Anyways, regarding modern-hebrew as constructed need citation. Oyd11 16:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Prtm

This page seems to be written entirely in the conlang, with no explanatory text in any natural language as far as I can tell, or links to such. Can anyone suggest why it might be notable enough to list in the short list of links in this article rather than in one of the "list of constructed/artistic/fictional/etc languages" articles? --Jim Henry 13:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the whole section Examples of Artificial Languages is redundant. I am going to remove it. — Tobias Bergemann 13:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Ygyde as maximizing conciseness?

What evidence is there that Ygyde maximizes conciseness or even was intended by its creator to do so? My understanding is that its design might arguably make it easier to learn than languages with a larger root vocabulary to memorize, and its lack of consonant clusters might make it easier to pronounce than many other conlangs, but that this comes at the expense of almost all content words being longish compounds. Further, there seems to be no extended text in the language, only a few sample sentences, so we can't see any direct evidence of how concise it is when writing at length. --Jim Henry 15:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Hahn aren sathyrrah ? What?

The "Wikis on or about constructed languages" header lists this link, genuinely pointless site. Anyone know what it's about or is it better that we delete it? Echternacht 00:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree it should probably be deleted until/unless we know more about it. If it's not auto-generated nonsense text, it's a fairly impressive corpus for a conlang (most conlang creators don't write this much in their conlang, or at least don't put this much text on the web) -- but the publicity seems pointless when there is no comment or explanation in any other language.

For another curiosity of the same kind, see:

http://prtm.50megs.com/index.html

which, based on word frequencies and other patterns, seems to be in the same conlang as User:Maintenance's user pages. --Jim Henry 01:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Aha -- I just checked User:Maintenance's pages again, to see if he/she had replied to my question about their conlang. They hadn't, but the main user page has recently been edited to add a link to the "Hahn aren sathyrrah" page! --Jim Henry 02:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

While impressive that such a large corpus has been generated, there's little information regarding whatever this person is trying to express. It's an anomalous dot that lacks sense. The link'll be removed until we can get more information.

Weird that the user refuses to answer to the inquiries, though. You'd think a conlanger like this'd be more than excited to talk about their language, rather than just in. Echternacht 03:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Maybe it's his private language, and he wants to put in online in case is hard-drive fries again and he doesn't want to bother with free web-hosts. 222.158.163.111 10:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Petaylish

The external link to "Petaylish" takes you to a message board without a single post. Delete?67.170.176.203 06:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Quite so. Thank you for pointing it out. In fact, I even doubt if a link to a forum of an individual language would be needed in the article about conlangs in general. I removed it. —IJzeren Jan _Uszkiełtu? 06:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)