Re: A Bit of a Flame

Remi Villatel wrote:

> I won't comment every sentence but there is one point about which I
> totally
> agree with you: The so-called "universals" are here just to be violated.
> When somebody creates a language, they has no rule to respect but to ask
> themself if it fits in their conlang, if it sounds good to their ears.
> Newcomers and "oldcomers" shouldn't come here and ask "Am I entitled
> to do
> this or that?".

I don't think anyone here disagrees with that fundamental point.  But
many times, when one of us is creating a conlang, we seek
verisimilitude.  In that case, if the goal is to create a conlang that
could believably be a human natlang. then it is perfectly reasonable to
ask on here whether this or that feature is plausible in that context.

If verisimilitude isn't one of your goals, then by all means, screw the
universals and do as you will.  It's an art, after all.