Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Advice wanted re 'Briefscript'

From:Raymond A. Brown <raybrown@...>
Date:Saturday, September 19, 1998, 14:13
At 2:49 pm -0700 18/9/98, Robert J. Petry wrote:
>Raymond A. Brown wrote: > >> [kut] >> >> Fair enough. It depends, it seems to me, on the _purpose_ of the language. >> Long years ago when learning Speedwords I did find (sorry Bob, but it's >> what _I_ experienced) the lack of self-segregating morphemes a problem*, >> especially as morpheme division can make a very considerable difference to >> the way the word is pronounced in that language. >> >> (*Ok - you can segregate them once you've learnt the _whole_ language. But >> I do _not_ want to start a discussion of Speedwords here. That is better >> reserved IMO for AUXLANG or done in private. ) > >Again, if you bring up the subject, which you do each time, then how can you >expect to not get a rebuttal comment, especially to a speck that you have >extended into a volcano. In fact, it is absolutely _no problem_ at all, >period.
Is *is* what I actually did experience - period. Nor is it a speck that I have turned into a volcano - and IMHO such silly language is merely provocative. However, I will not be provked here. Please do read what I write. I thought I had made it clear in the wording I used that it was my own _personal_ experience. I tried to avoid casting any judgment about whether I was correct or not; I am sorry that I was not successful in this & that my words were taken as an attack on Speedwords. Ok - it might be my fault. I may be lacking in perspicuity. But it's where I came from. [snip]
>I respectfully request you not bring this up about Speedwords again on the >conlang list if, as you say: #1 you don't want to discuss it here
CONLANG, as I understand it, is for the discussion of artificial languages of whatever kind while they are under construction & for the discussion of related linguistic topics (e.g. self-segregating morphology). My yet unnamed brief-script is very much under construction. Speedwords was the starting point of my project. That, I'm afraid, is pure, simple fact. But, if it helps, I promise not to name the my starting point on CONLANG again. I HAVE NO WISH TO ATTACK OR CRITICIZE SPEEDWORDS PER SE ON THIS LIST! BUT - the discussion of self-segrating morphology is IMHO a valid topic for CONLANG.
>and #2 you >think it actually should be discussed elsewhere.
The AUXLANG list was set up specifically for those who wish to discuss AILs which have already been constructed - Speedwords is one such. But as in one of the many tedious exchanges on that list it became quite apparent that we meant quite different things by the term "monosyllabic", I have no doubt that we understand quite different things by the term "morpheme" and hence have quite different notions of what constitutes "self-segregating morphology". In the words of Mark Line: Our ontologies are different. Therefore, sadly, I feel little profit would be gained by our discussing this anywhere. Ray.