Re: 32 related conlangs by 6 unique authors

Hallo!

On Mon, 20. Nov 2006 03:31:48, Herman Miller wrote:

> Gary Shannon wrote:
> > http://fiziwig.com/anglosic/tree.php
> >
> > It's intersting that a lot of conlang projects, either solo or
> > collaborative, often get off to a flying start but then sputter and die
> > after a short while. I guess that's why I have so many sketch-langs and
> > so few "mature" conlangs. There's that exciting first rush of enthusiasm
> > when a new idea takes hold, but then, for me at least, my attention span
> > fades when it gets down to the point where massive amounts of "clerical"
> > or uninspiring repetative work needs to be done.  At some point I have to
> > sit down and slog through the list of all the fruits and vegatables and
> > coin words for them all, and that sort of work can just get sooooo
> > boring!
>
> The whole vocabulary thing can really get to be time-consuming and
> tedious after a while.
I know very well what you are talking about.  Vocabulary is indeed very
time-consuming and can get tedious, especially if you want something
that feels right to you.  The vocabulary of Old Albic is growing only
very slowly, while the grammar is already quite advanced.

> [...]
>
> > So my current antidote is to do some sketch-langs based on making small
> > alterations to an existing natlang or prior conlang. Five others have
> > joined in the fun and each spent a few minutes contributing their
> > sketch-lang ideas and the family tree of languages descended from the
> > original root is up to 32 members. Drop by and take a peek, or spend a
> > few minutes adding your own sketch-lang to the family tree.
> >
> > --gary
>
> Sounds interesting. I've occasionally done that sort of thing, going
> back to my earliest language, Olaetian. Usually I end up with only brief
> samples of the related languages, like Nimoryikh, Azzian, Neveldrayin,
> and Gwelona Owachan. Back then I didn't know anything about how related
> languages developed historically, but now that I do have some idea about
> that, I think it's harder to get started on a family of related
> languages, since I want to make the changes realistic. So every time
> I've tried this in recent years, I get bogged down in the details and
> just lose interest in all the languages of the group.
I am quick at working out a sequence of sound changes for a daughter
language of whatever; however, actually *applying* them to the original
language is something else.  I currently have several projects of this
kind: several daughter, sister and cousin languages of Old Albic, as well
as one Romance (Germanech), one West Germanic (Frenquich), one East Germanic
(Vandalic) and one continental Celtic language (Camonic).  Yet, none of them
have advanced far for now.

... brought to you by the Weeping Elf