Re: Calling all Conlangers!

Am 19.01.02, John Cowan yscrifef:

> I just looked at the thread via Google (http://groups.google.com)
> and didn't see anything insulting about artlangs.  Can you point
> to the author, or the Message-ID, or anything?
Perhaps it doesn't show up on Google yet.

The two in particular (Sophia's and Lyn's response to her):

QUOTE:

Lyn David Thomas <lyn@...>

On Wed, 09 Jan 2002 14:50:48 +0900, Mike Ralls
<mikralls@...> wrote:

>sophia wrote:
>
>>>North Carolina State University does (or did 5 years ago when
>>>I last looked into it)
>>
>> If this is true it's enough to make one despair.
>
>
>Acording to the Onion (cough) more people speak Klingon than
>Apache.
However as Klingon is a made up language of recent origin it
lacks the depth of Apache, thus should not be anything other than
a linguistic toy, not really something that a serious institution
should be handing out credits for as an actual language.

END QUOTE

_I_ took it as a slight that the art inherent in conlanging is
not worthy of serious study. Or by inferencece that the products
thereof are somehow less artistic than modern art or music
(neither of which, by the way, I can stand; but I do not deny the
artistry inherent!).

I should like to see Mr Knowitall try his hand at Teonaht. Or
even Klingon. (I'm not conceited enough to place Kerno in there!
Maybe some day...)

Padraic.
--
Gwerez dah, chee gwaz vaz, ha leal.

Replies