> Hey, all.
>
> Here is the current version of the Language Code. There aren't many
> changes from the last version. The most notable being that the a
> priori/a posteriori attribute is in the Lexicon section where it
> belongs, rather than in the Type section. I've also added a
> head-first/head-last parameter in the Syntax section which can be used
> as a replacement of the original (s,v,o) parameter or in addition to
> it. Eventually I'll probably need to add more explanatory prose, but
> for now just see what you come up with. This should probably be
> considered a beta test version; I need to wrap this up before I leave
> for the summer; do let me know what you think.
>
> Dirk
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
> The Language Code
>
>
> Introduction.
>
> The Language Code began as a tongue-in-cheek imitation of the Geek
> Code
> (
http://www.geekcode.com/), but it can be used as a tool to create a
> typological "thumbnail sketch" of any given language, natural or
> constructed, without locking that language into categories which might
> be misleading; for example, all languages exhibit some degree of
> agglutination, but not all languages are "agglutinating." Using scalar
> values for variables is meant to suggest the continuous nature of
> linguistic categories.
>
> There are six main categories, each of which are subdivided into
> varying numbers of subcategories: i) Type of language, ii) Phonology,
> iii) Writing system, iv) Morphology, v) Syntax, and vi) Lexicon. Any
> idiosyncracies in the choice and values given for the subcategories
> within these major categories is my responsibility and does not
> necessarily reflect conventional wisdom with respect to language
> description. However, I do think it's a useful list.
>
>
> How to use the Language Code.
>
> First, find a language you're interested in. Then go through the Code
> and determine the values for each of the categories. Some things to
> keep in mind:
>
> * If you're not sure what the value should be, you can always use a
> question mark following the category label.
>
> * If a category doesn't apply to your language, place an asterisk "*"
> following the category label. For example, if the language you're
> interested in does not have a writing system (other than the phonetic
> transcription), you would encode this fact as "W*".
>
> * Sometimes the value of a category falls within a range; you can
> indicate the range by using parens. For example, Ma+(++) could
> indicate
> a language which has some degree of agglutination, but which perhaps
> varies by part of speech so that nouns show little agglutination (a+)
> but verbs show more (a+++). Or it might indicate a language which is
> still under development, with the enclosed values showing the planned
> range.
>
> * If your language has a value for a particular category, but that
> category isn't listed in the Code, you may always use the value 'o'
> for
> "other". (You may also petition me to have your value included in
> future versions of the Language Code.)
>
> When you are done, you will have a string of categories and values
> which will provide a typological profile of your language. By itself
> this information may not be particularly informative; the true value
> of
> the Code will come in the head-to-head comparison with other languages
> using the Code and its categories as a common vocabulary of
> comparison.
>
>
> T type
> c constructed
> x auxiliary
> f fictional
> e logical
> p personal
> n natural
> o other
>
> P phonology
> t tonal
> d tonal domain
> m mora
> s syllable
> f foot/word
> c contour tones
> r register
> # number of tones
> l level tones
> ! downstep/downdrift
> # number of tones
> p phonemes
> +/- allophony
> # consonant phonemes
> # vowel phonemes
> s syllable template {c,v}
>
> W writing system
> n natural
> c constructed
> t type of script
> f featural (Hangul, Tengwar)
> c abjad ("Consonantal")
> d abugida ("Devanagari")
> a alphabet
> s syllabic
> l logographic
> o other
> r regularity/irregularity (+/-)
>
> M morphology
> a agglutinating (+/-)
> i isolating (+/-)
> f inflecting (+/-)
> h head-marking (+/-)
> d dependent-marking (+/-)
> t# number of tense distinctions
> a# number of aspect distinctions
> m# number of mood distinctions
> t/a# number of distinct tense/aspect combinations (where a
> meaningful distinction between tense and aspect cannot
> be
> made) (also t/m, a/m, etc)
> c# number of case distinctions
> g# number of genders or noun classes
> n# number of number distinctions
>
> S syntax
> f head-first/head-final (+/-)
> b basic word order {v,s,o} (may substitute dots when the
> terms
> s = 'subject' and o = 'object' are not meaningful or
> when word
> order is not fixed)
> arg argument alignment
> n nominative/accusative
> e ergative/absolutive
> a active/stative
> h hierarchical
> t topic/focus
> s split/mixed system
> r semantic role
> o other
>
> L lexicon
> a a priori/a posteriori (-/+)
> c compounding/incorporation (+/-)
> d derivation (+/-)
> # number of words so far
>
> English: Tn Pt*p++24,9(c)v(c) Wntar-- Mi++f+dt2a3c2n2 Sf++bsvoargn
> Lc++d+1000000+
> Shoshoni: Tn Pt*p+++12,6(c)v(v/c) Wntar++++ Ma++f+h++d+t/a13c3n3
> Sf---bsovargn Lc+++d++25000?
> Miapimoquitch: Tcf Pt*p+++12,4(c)v(v/c) W* Mf+++h+++t*a2c*g*n4
> Sf++++argh La----c++d++600
> Shemspreg: Tcp Pt*p+22,5s(c+)v(c+) Wntar+++ Mf+d+++t/a3c3g*n2
> Sf++bsvoargn La++++c+d++1000
>
> --
> Dirk Elzinga
> Dirk_Elzinga@byu.edu
>
> "I believe that phonology is superior to music. It is more variable
> and
> its pecuniary possibilities are far greater." - Erik Satie
>