Re: Are conlangs fictional?
| From: | Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Saturday, March 23, 2002, 0:51 |
|---|
At 09:01 AM 3/22/02 +0100, Christophe Grandsire wrote:
>So in short, if "fictional" means: to be used in a fictional setting, than
>Tolkien's languages are fictional. But if "fictional" means: without any
>reality outside of a fiction (the common meaning), then no, Tolkien's
>languages
>are not fictional. They may not be complete, we may lack information on them,
>but they can still be used to compose poems and the like, not only by Tolkien
>but also by other people, and for this reason are as real as can be.
This is where I stand on the question, and you expressed it much more
clearly and eloquently than I could have.
---
Bob's Original Hero Stuff Page! [Circle of HEROS member]
http://www.angelfire.com/super2/bobgreenwade/original.htm
Music from Bob's Computer! (CD now available!)
http://mp3.com/BobsComputer
Want more hits to your web page?
http://nomorehits.com/cgi-bin/start.cgi?referrer=bobgreenwade
http://ads.clickthru.net/bannerlink?host=264157&ban=4