Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

has anyone made a real language

From:Markus Miekk-oja <fam.miekk-oja@...>
Date:Sunday, April 27, 2003, 14:01
>Phonemic diversity is a desirable feature of a language >because it helps distinguish the words. Other forms of >linguistic diversity (irregularities) may not be desirable, >because they make the language difficult to learn.
When has the most beautiful human languages been regular? Tell me, is French regular? Is Hebrew regular? Old Greek? I see from your post that the answer is "no, I don't enjoy irregularities and quirks." From this, we perhaps should derive the conclusion that any language with ergative systems, or the Bantu verb-markings is diverse enough and in fact a "quirk" that they should be disregarded. If the only thing about a language that is worth anything is its easiness to learn, then you are clearly in the wrong group. And I wrote strictly about _irregularities_, not diversity, large differences there (you are confusing two concepts) - I talked about rubbato lines in music, I talked about weird tonal catastrophies that somehow get salvaged because of a genious guitarist, I talked about sudden and unexpected changes of tempo, style, timbre. Not about diversity. Listen to some music where the logics of music suddenly are suspended - go buy an experimental record. I see you cared not to bother about the fact that the greats were greats since they knew how to break the rules in the right way, and why a computer won't be able to do that - without first analyzing all of the human brain and genome and whatnot. And yet another point, "irregularities", what about very foreign yet regular grammars? What about the Australian languages with totally free word order? Would a fully regular version of them still be non-functional since they are unknown to most people? With all due respect, Markus Miekk-oja