Re: ANNOUNCE: My new conlang S11
|From:||H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@...>|
|Date:||Friday, March 11, 2005, 22:02|
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 12:58:50PM +0100, Henrik Theiling wrote:
> "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh@...> writes:
> > On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 03:03:04PM +0100, Henrik Theiling wrote:
> > > This is a difference: it's not a goal for me. However, becoming able
> > > to at least pronounce the langs is becoming a more and more important
> > > goal for me, especially after listening to the impressive sound
> > > samples that have recently be posted here.
> > Would fluency become a goal for you if, by some crazy circumstances,
> > there would be conlang meetings where people actually conversed in
> > their conlangs? ;-)
> Hmm, how exactly should I imagine that meeting? Everyone talking in
> their own language and no-one understanding? :-P
I had in mind more a meeting where people teach each other how to say
things in their respective conlangs. Or, one of those rare occasions
when a conlanger learns another's conlang, visits him, and speak only
in that conlang for 30 mins (which I remember reading about, but I
forget which conlang it was).
> No, I don't think it's becoming a goal. But maybe a language I will
> once create appeals to me in such a way that I just have to learn it.
> Who knows? :-)
> > Tense/aspect marking is optional in Tatari Faran. If you *really*
> > wanted to draw a distinction, you could have _kuini kana ... dakat_
> > for "I acquire a doll (now)" vs. _kuini nara ... dakat_ for "I have a
> > doll (I acquired it in the past)".
> Ah, I see. Although it's optional in many of my langs, too, I tend to
> still miss it sometimes. :-) After some conlangs, I more and more
> enter the track of less optional aspect markers, while tense is
> totally neglected. Strange since my L1 does not draw a clear line
> between these, has no synthetic aspect system, but the tense (mixed
> with aspect) markers are mandatory. That's almost the opposite of
> what I feel is the right way now.
Heh. For me, I'm just reverting to my L1 where tense is basically
non-existent and aspect is ignored 95% of the time.
> What categories are mandatory in Tatari Faran? And which common ones
> are not?
I'm not sure what you mean by 'categories'... I assume you mean
Verbs can basically appear in isolation in Tatari Faran. There are
various tense/aspect markers which are completely optional and
essentially behave like adverbs.
> > :-) For me, I feel that it would be too limiting if I had to resort to
> > software to compose sentences for me, esp. if I hope to someday be
> > able to converse in my conlang!
> Maybe it's that programming is so much fun for me -- therefore, I mix
> two fun things. :-)
I love programming too! I program for fun all the time. In fact, I
wrote a lot of software for managing Ebisédian and Tatari Faran. The
lexicon tool which drives the Tatari Faran lexicon search page is the
same tool I use every day to look up TF words. :-) I guess I just
don't want to *have* to use software whenever I want to compose a
> > Heh. I like how you conlang by creating Lisp grammars. Does that mean
> > you can do automatic translation between your conlangs? (That'd be
> > awesome.) Perhaps the Universal Translator *is* possible after all...!
> > ;-)
> Oh, no, not at all. :-) The abstractions I type in Lisp are very
> closely related with the corresponding language. E.g. I do have to
> select the case, for instance. Only the gory details of syntax,
> morphology, and sandhi are handled by the Lisp grammar. I don't
> expect to solve the translation problem... :-)[...]
Ah, OK. :-)
Frank disagreement binds closer than feigned agreement.