Re: Natlang most similar to your conlang [WAS: Analyzing Ayeri's syntactic and voice alignment (long)]

Arthaey Angosii skrev:
 > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 4:49 AM, R A Brown
 > <ray@...> wrote:
 >>  Originality is interesting - natlang clones can be so
 >>  boring ;)
 >
 > This makes me wonder which natlang(s) are most similar to
 > Asha'ille, and whether it has any truly unattested,
 > original aspects to it.
 >
 > I've read in passing about parameterization as a way of
 > explaining how different languages end up with different
 > surface forms. Are there any efforts to describe many
 > languages based on such parameters, so that you can then
 > compare your language's parameters against other
 > languages'?

The question is a bit moot, since a conlang may be similar
to different natlangs in different parts of its structure:
Sohlob is (by design) similar to Persian, and Turkic and
Middle Korean in its phonology but (by accident) similar to
Australian languages and Tibetan in its morphosyntax. Add to
this that its 'ancestor' Kijeb is more like Algonkinian!

The Language Code seems a good thing, though.


/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch atte melroch dotte se
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   "C'est en vain que nos Josués littéraires crient
   à la langue de s'arrêter; les langues ni le soleil
   ne s'arrêtent plus. Le jour où elles se *fixent*,
   c'est qu'elles meurent."           (Victor Hugo)