Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: The Language Code, take 2 (or 3)

From:And Rosta <a.rosta@...>
Date:Wednesday, June 11, 2003, 22:38
Dirk:
> > Maybe also a parameter for associated culture, real or fictional? > > I dunno. The associated culture is, strictly speaking, extralinguistic > However, there is a Writing section, which could also be argued to be > extralinguistic. Right now I'm inclined not to include it
OTOH as an ingredient of a *conlang* code it strikes me as very important in characterizing the conlang. But as you see this as a language code, I take your point.
> >> M morphology > >> a agglutinating (+/-) > >> i isolating (+/-) > >> f inflecting (+/-) > >> h head-marking (+/-) > >> d dependent-marking (+/-) > >> t# number of distinct tenses > >> a# number of distinct aspects > >> m# number of distinct moods > >> t/a# number of distinct tense/aspect combinations (where a > >> meaningful distinction between tense and aspect > >> cannot be > >> made) (also t/m, a/m, etc) > >> c# number of distinct cases > >> g# number of genders or noun classes > >> n# number of number distinctions > > > > Does this mean (i) number of X in the grammar, (ii) number of X encoded > > morphologically, or (iii) number of X encoded inflectionally? Since > > it's > > in the Morphology section it must mean (ii) or (iii), but (iii) would > > make sense only for Mf+. So maybe (ii) is meant; but that's much less > > interesting > > I did intend (ii). However, the number marking parameter is (i) (a > decision which was arrived at during a brief discussion that Rob Nierse > and I had), so for the sake of consistency, all of the Morphology > categories should likewise be (i)
What if these (t, a, m, etc.) are lexicalized? E.g. "maybe" as opposed to "irrealis". Or "a few" as opposed to "paucal". I guess the features have to be grammaticalized somehow, as opposed to lexicalized, in order to warrant inclusion. So a conlang with 38 adpositions would not count as having 38 cases, say.
> > For syntax, I urge a parameter for head-First/head-Last, e.g. English > > would > > be Sf++, Livagain Sf+++++ > > As a replacement for the b(s,v,o) parameter, or in addition to it? I > would prefer it as a replacement, but basic word order is one of the > classic typological parameters and is immediately recognizable
I would prefer it as a replacement too, but I think many people are fond of the SVO parameter.
> >> English: Tn Pt*p++24,9(c)v(c) Wntar-- Mi++f+dt2a3c2n2 Sbsvoargn > >> Lc++d+1000000+ > > > > Why "(c)v(c)"? That's an unusual characterization of the English > > syllable > > Or does c and v mean "one or more Cs/Vs"? I guess it must > > That's what I intended for the English example; in that case, the c's > really encode onsets and codas rather than individual consonants. But > the Shoshoni and Tepa examples encode numbers of segments, and the coda > consonants of Shoshoni can only be homorganic with a following onset. I > can't think of any good way to encode this kind of syllable structure > information without making the Code unwieldy. Any suggestions?
Break it down into what you (qua phonology wonk) consider to be the key parameters? I also suggest letting people apply the code to their conlangs experimentally (beta test) before you finalize it. --And. --And.