Our Beholders (was Aesthetics)
| From: | Leo Moser <via_acadon@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Saturday, October 20, 2007, 17:13 |
|---|
--- On Fri 10/19, =?iso-8859-1?q?J=F6rg_Rhiemeier?= < joerg_rhiemeier@WEB.DE > wrote:
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?J=F6rg_Rhiemeier?= [mailto: joerg_rhiemeier@WEB.DE]To:
CONLANG@listserv.brown.eduDate: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 23:13:52 +0200Subject: Re:
AestheticsHallo!On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:54:46 +0100, R A Brown wrote:> Edgard
Bikelis wrote:> [...]> > Maybe aesthetics are just for vain tongues :
).> > Some would hold that all conlanging is vain.Some hold that all
conlanging except auxlanging is vain. However,I'd say that auxlanging is the
vainest kind of conlanging - it iscertainly more vain to aspire to create
something that the wholeworld will use on a daily base, than to create
something just forthe fun of it! Add to this that the race is practically
alreadyrun, and English is the winner.> I know well that there are some
conlangs in which aesthetics do play a> part. They are, I guess, mainly
artlangs. Indeed, there is IMO no reason> why aesthetics shouldn't play a
part. I'm sure they played a large part> in Tolkien's Quenya.Sure. Quenya
was
made entirely to fit the personal taste of itscreator. Many, if not most artlangs
are that way. However,aesthetics sometimes play a role in other kinds of
conlangs as well.Many auxlangers try to make their languages beautiful because
theyfeel that a beautiful language will find it easier to be adoptedby millions
of people than an ugly one. Of course, beauty lies inthe eye of the beholder
...///////////////////////
Yes, but we often have some idea who the beholders
are (or may be) for our projects.
Regards, Leo J. Moser
Sent via:via_acadon@excite.com
_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!