Re: What defines a conlang?

Hallo!

Paul Bennett wrote:

> On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 15:07:05 -0500, Jörg Rhiemeier
> <joerg_rhiemeier@...> wrote:
>
> > I'd say that a conlang is a language deliberately designed by
> > an individual or a (small) group; a natlang is a language that
> > evolved from another language during centuries of usage by a
> > community.
>
> This overlooks the pidgin/creole situation, where a complete language can
> emerge more or less fully formed in a matter of a couple of generations
> over a reasonably small (depending on your domain) group of people,
> without much if any planning.
>
> Also, there are natlangs that consist of a very diverse set of dialects
> that are deliberately engineered, codified and koinized. Koine being the
> obvious example, but if my brain isn't playing tricks on me, I seem to
> recall Bahasa Indonesia kinda fits the bill, too.
>
> It's a hard set to define. I'm tempted to go with the "second-generation
> L1 speakers" thing, but that I suspect locks out dying or dead languages
> going through a resurgence.
You are right, there are borderline cases and a "gray area" between
natlangs and conlangs.  It's rather like a spectrum than like a
black-and-white binary.  The extremes are vernacular dialects on
one end and a priori conlangs on the other; many languages fall
somewhere between.

Greetings,

Jörg.

Replies