Re: proposed conlang database

http://conlang.alkaline.org
[SNIP]
>>The last thing i added is in the "current language status" section:
>>
>>-vocabulary size
>This is a notoriously difficult number to compute. I may have 2000 words,
>including every body part and tree-borne fruit or nut I could think of, but
>how often would I be likely to use the word for 'walnut' or 'toenail'?
>Furthermore, the agglutination in Lahabic and its 30+ prefixes are
>complicating factors.
I was thinking along the lines of a vague estimate: 10's, 100's, 1000's, or
10,000's (or maybe a little bit more distinct than that). It's just a way to
tell how developed a language is, ie. it's useability.

>>-estimated date of useability: not necessarily when the language is frozen
>>in development, but when people could learn the language and use it, and
>>not
>>worry about big things changing. Naturally, some languages will never be
>>useable.
>Well, you ('you' in general terms) _can_ write in Lahabic (although some
>words are very long). As a 'classical' language, pronunciation is likely to
>vary according to region, much like Mediaeval Latin.
Is Lahabic fully developed now? Meaning, have you fully decided on all the
grammar, and have most of the primary vocabulary decided on, and are only
adding more esoteric vocabulary now? Or are you still messing around with
grammar and changing words around? This category is more of the status in
the real world, as opposed to how it's used in the fictional world.

http://conlang.alkaline.org