Re: Lighting Some Flames: Towards conlang artistry

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Dirk Elzinga wrote:

> Hey.
>
> Having blathered on for four paragraphs, I failed to recognize what I
> felt to be the most cogent part of Jesse's original posting; the lack
> of critical repsonses to each other's work. While I don't think that
> we should formally declare "schools" of conlanging aesthetic (since I
> don't believe language construction to be an art, and also because we
> seem to have formed de facto schools already), I do hope that we can
> give the grammatical posts which come our way more careful attention.
> I, for my part, resolve to do this and to provide more feedback on
> phonological matters which come up. I think we owe it to each other
> to be more responsive to each other's work; that's why I joined the
> list oh so many years ago -- to see what others had to say about my
> ideas and to say something about the ideas of others.
*nods*  I also resolve to give more attention to the grammatical posts
that come my way.  That'll be my "school": respecting people's languages
the way I'd like tthem to respect mine, by giving them attention and
criticism.

--Patrick


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Prurio modo viri qui in arbore pilosa est.
                        ~~Elvis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~