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

 --- Dirk Elzinga skrzypszy:

> Since discussion on the Language Code (such as it was) has died down, I
> now take this opportunity to present the revised version, incorporating
> the comments I received. Feel free to suggest additions or other
> changes.
Good! I had been meaning to reply earlier, but couldn't find the time. So I'll
use the occasion now!

> T       type
>         f       fictional
>         l       logical
>         x       auxiliary
>         p       personal
>         n       natural
>         o       other
Hm. What is the difference between "fictional" and "personal"? I have some
experience in categorising conlangs, and my impression is that this distinction
is incredibly tough to make. Personally, I would merge them under the header:
          a       artlang

However, another distinction should IMO be made within this category: between a
priori and a posteriori (a scale would be useful here, something like a+++).

As an additional category I would add "philosophical language". Although most
philangs I am aware of were intended as auxlangs, they are different enough
from Esperanto, Interlingua and the like for a separate category.

It could also be an idea to add a catogory "s" for subset and superset
languages.

An interesting thing, Dirk! As soon as I'll have time, I will try it on my own
languages.

Groeten,
Jan

=====
"Originality is the art of concealing your source." - Franklin P. Jones

__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus - For a better Internet experience
http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/yplus/yoffer.html

Reply