Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

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

From:And Rosta <a.rosta@...>
Date:Thursday, June 12, 2003, 12:30
Jan:
> --- And Rosta skrzypszy: > > > A personal conlang is one not created as an aesthetic object but rather
as a
> > code for private use. In that sense it is like an auxiliary language,
but
> > for personal/private rather than international use > > I am aware that there is a fundamental difference between those two. My
point
> was that it is hard to establish which qualification would fit a
particular
> conlang best, because this is something only its creator can tell, and we
are
> not always able to ask him/her. Besides, many conlangs are a bit of both
You are right, but the same could be said of the other sorts of conlang, viz 'fictional'/artlang and engineered. You can't properly classify them without knowing the author's intentions, though often those intentions are easily guessed from the nature of the conlang.
> > My feeling is that philosophical langs fall into the class of engineered > > langs (which would also include logical langs) > > Interesting, I hadn't even thought of that possibility. But yes, that
seems
> plausible. Luckily, we can opt for more that one category simultaneously, > right, so that a language can both be "e" and "x"?
Certainly -- my own conlang is both artlang and engelang. --And.