Re: Obsessed with Mouth Noises

Philippe wrote:

<<So it's just the same for a natlang, or for a conlang.
It is possible to exchange without bothering about
talking and pronunciation. It's the same for Chinese
ideograms too, AFAIK. This clearly proves that
phonology is a peripheral question, not a central one.>>

I don't think this follows.   I could do the same with mouth sounds.   Let's 
say I'm completely paralyzed, lying in a bed, and all I can do is grunt in 
various ways.   Someone comes near, say, a cup of water, and I say, [II>IIIII] 
(don't know how to indicate tone, but it starts out as mid, and then lowers 
dramatically).   Someone walks near the TV, I say, [I?I?] (both with high tones), 
and they get the idea that I want to watch TV.   Here, they can understand 
with no syntax, only sounds.   This clearly proves that syntax is a peripheral 
question, not a central one.   Also, the logic of this statement:

<<By the way, it is quite possible to imagine a language
that would be only a written one, and not used for
talking>>

Seems to be that if it's possible to have a purely written language (and it 
is), then the study of speech must be irrelevant to *all* languages, even 
spoken ones.   I don't understand how that follows, either.

Also, just to throw another point of view out there (and this one isn't 
mine), there are some who hold the believe that there are only two relevant fields 
within linguistics: Phonetics and Semantics.   Phonology, Morphology, 
Pragmatics, and even Syntax, are all irrelevant, in their opinion, and can be reduced 
to either Phonetics or Semantics.   Now, I tend to share the point of view 
that every field has its value.   And the same goes for conlanging.   Not only do 
I draw from every field of linguistics, but also every point of view within 
each field.   Also, I'd like to point out that purely graphical languages can 
still have phonetics.   In that case, the active articulators aren't the 
tongue, lips, vocal chords, etc., but the instruments you use to write and the hands 
that control them.   ;)

Also, Gary wrote:

<<On the other hand, my own particular unhealthy
obsession with the graphical form of written signs,
glyphs, alphabets, pictograms, runes, etc., ...  Well,
I just think my obsession is cooler than your
obssession,  So there. ;-)>>

Just like to remind you that not only do I spend a lot of time on my 
alphabets, but I also have a pictograph language, and I'm about halfway through the 
Babel text.   When I'm done with it, it'll be on Langmaker, and you can judge 
whether my preoccupation with phonetics and phonology has hindered me in any 
way.

(P.S.: Someone pointed out that my earlier message came out with no line 
breaks.   Quite frankly, I'm at my wit's end.   If I send a message using AOL, it 
comes out as HTML.   Now if I send it using the web browser, it comes out 
without line breaks.   I just don't know what to do.   Maybe I'll just have to get 
some other e-mail account and run it somewhere else; I don't know.   I'll 
weigh my options.)

-David
*******************************************************************
"sunly eleSkarez ygralleryf ydZZixelje je ox2mejze."
"No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."

-Jim Morrison

http://dedalvs.free.fr/

Replies