Re: LeGuin was Re: Introduction

--- Ar rhespondent l' Amanda Babcock:

> Yscreus la Sarra la Cavurn:
>
> > Ursula Le Guin is said to be a conlanger, but
> > I have reservations about that, despite some
> > of the linguistic information
> It's at least as much of a conlang
> as many of our efforts.
> > but I'm still not convinced that she is as
> > compulsively dedicated as some of the
> > rest of us are to the nitty gritty details of
> > our inventions.
Oy! Since when is compulsive dedication a prereq
for conlanging? Now, you (Sally) and I are of a
kind in making a language and working on it for a
long time. But many of us whip something up, play
with it a while and then toss it aside like a new
toy on Christmas. Where's the dedication in that?
To say nothing of compulsion; apart from the
compulsion to do it over again with some new
idea.

> > I, for one,
> > have been working on Teonaht for almost forty
> > years; it's like a nursing a
> > child that will never quite grow up.
This is commendable; and inshalla Kerno and
Talarian will be in a similar state by 2030!

To my way of thinking, that doesn't make T any
'more' of a conlang than any of the dozens of
abandonned conlangs described or named on the
list - or Le Guin's language. [Mind you, the time
and effort put into T mean that there's more _in_
it - that I understand and can to an extent
appreciate!] It smacks a little bit of classism,
though: WE are Conlangers because WE are obsessed
and dedicated to OUR creations; whereas you are a
mere dilettante, a rank amateur because you don't
show the same singleminded concentration on the
activity.

And if the conlang came about solely to support a
book, so what? Klingon is no different!

> (One of the songs:
I have the tape. Very pleasant sound!

Padraic.


=====
Percumion farfer, ec nasteros em purfelos, polim ed siramet.
        -Pomperios Perfurios.




.

Reply