Re: A Bit of a Flame

I think he was writing in his English Future-lang (perhaps an "Insult
Lang"?). And you call yourself a conlanger. :p

> Trent Pehrson wrote:
>
> > For every category you
> > create, though, examples can be found that break you models.
>
> Oh, you omitted an 'r' there: "your models".
>
> > I guarantee
> > that if one of Chomsky?s finite state machines started
> > generating ?grammatically correct? sentences today that humans
> > then would?t recognize them as such.
>
> There is an 'n' in "wouldn't". Furthermore, I doubt that your
> double use of "that" is grammatical.
>
> > If people want to use linguistics jargan in a new
>
> Oops, another typo there. It's "jargon".
>
> > Yes, Iknow.
>
> Now, that *would* be correct if it had been Calénnawn, since
> Calénnawn affixes the personal pronoun 'I' to the verb.
>
> > a friendly word to you conlangers who are not afraid to create?
> > whether you are university-trained linguists or nor not.
>
> You should have left out the "nor", I'm afraid.
>
> It's a bit of a pity your post contains so many errors.
>
> René
>
>