Re: Looking for a simple conlang to learn

@SuomenkieliMaa

S> --- claudio <claudio.soboll@...> wrote:
>> a) to learn a weird not-accepted conlang first. why
>> ?
>> because it helps you to find mistakes,lacks,things
>> which are not
>> optimal solved instead of adopting one conlang as
>> "ideal" or "perfect".
S> Nice advice, Claudio! I'd offer my own Vya:a:h, as it
S> may very well exemplify many mistakes/lacks, etc.
S> already in its infant stage (I'm a novice), but Nathan
S> wants a very simple grammar - and Vya:a:h (even though
S> an infant) looks like it will be a monster of
S> monsters.

>> b) looking at and learning several conlangs
>> simultaneuosly, instaed of
>> concentrating too much on one single conlang.
>> then you can extract the best ideas of all of those
>> and getting a
>> grisp whats important in language and whats just
>> redundancy or
>> detail-love.
S> Good point, which I must obviously have been
S> overlooking myself.  Guess sometimes one -esp. a
S> novice- might tend to pull from the inticing points of
S> natlangs...

>> the question is: which expressions do you want to
>> give *shorter* lentgh and
>> therefore spotting in your lang?
S> I don't follow you - what do you mean here?

well its simple.
consider tenses,cases,suffixes,particles consider all of those as "macros".
they evolved because they abbreviate very frequent used expressions.
you can omit e.g. "future tense" when you say
"in future i drive to work" instead of "i will drive to work"
hypothetically assumed people would not know the latter form,
im sure in evolution people would shorten it up to something like
"in fut i drive to work" or "futi drive to work"
thats natural because future tense is frequently used.
you may throw in that both expressions mean not exactly the same, but i hope you get my
point.
when you treat and think this way, then youll realize thats its a
matter of compactness + simplicity + enjoyment which makes a language usefull.
2 days ago i spake with a guy who is able to speak 6 languages
including polski,norsk,deutsch,english,francais,russki and asked him
wether he likes a more inflected or isolated grammar in language.
he choosed the inflection. linguists do not opine they describe only.
nevertheless its interesting to think about whats more natural privately.

with "spotting" i mean the election of certain kinds of
terms beeing assigned to short macros.
a psychological language would spot psychological terms.

for example: german does not spot terms of knowlede and evidence very much.
you cannot count the times this lack of distinction causes misunderstandings,hate and wrangles:
utterance of certainity: when youre ca. 99-100% confident about your predication you
"know something".
utterance of utter probability: when youre ca. 51- 98% confident about your predication
you "guess or assume".
utterance of possibility: when youre ca. 50% confident about your predication you "guess
or assume". again :-((
utterance of lower probability: when youre ca. 1- 49% confident about your predication
you "guess or assume". again :-((
utterance of       no evidence: when youre ca.  0-  1% confident about your predication you " ? ".

you could say 5 graduations are exaggerated distinction.
i think: for many terms 5 graduations are too much.
but for utterances i would say they are rather still too few.

and another thing to mention : whats about statements and opintions ?
theres a HUGE differende wether one claims validity of his utterances for everyone:
this we call "statements"
 or wether one claims validity of his utterances just for him: this we call
"opinions"

i went through several discussion and i noticed that wrangle always stopped when one
person reduced their statement to an opinion.
the problems are words like "i guess, i think, i mean," or when man dont even mention them.
is "i think.." a statement or opinion ??
its not usual to introduce utterances with "i state that.." or "i opine that.."
but its more than necessary to distinct to avoid redundant conflicts.

state something when you like to convince.
opine something when you dont like to convince.

so far,
c.s.
>> e.g. one psychologically-orientated, which offers
>> many short terms for psychological expression which
>> are in other
>> langugaes just very hard to describe.
>> for example: "a sympathy for a person which is mixed
>> with abit hate."
>> e.g. one spatial-orientated, which offers new terms
>> for spatial
>> directions, relations, positions, movements, etc.
>> which
>> could give sportsmen or other practically orientated
>> people a usefull
>> tool to communicate.
>> e.g. > a language optimized for describing complex
>> "manisfestations" very
>> easily, so for example "a brown table made of wood ,
>> 3 meter long, 10 cm
>> depth, very heavy," <- to describe with one word
>> only.
S> Cool suggestions :-D  I think I'll consider for my own
S> conlanging to come.  You're talking about sort of like
S> the feelings expressed by "saudade" in Portuguese or
S> "honne/tatemae" in Japanese, right?  Got one for
S> Vya:a:h already!  How about this: (adj)  "one who
S> frequently avoids eye-contact when telling a lie".


S> Matt33

S> __________________________________________________
S> Do You Yahoo!?
S> Spot the hottest trends in music, movies, and more.
S> http://buzz.yahoo.com/