Re: A Conlang, created by the group?

De: Pablo Flores <fflores@...>
Fecha: Martes 6 de Octubre de 1998 23:29
[...]
>Has anybody thought about the conculture? Not that we have to invent it,
but
>there should be a background.
>
I imagine we want no conAIL.
A fictional language for Sci Fi characters would involve us in worldbuilding
and I would propose to make a realy weird conlang (any joins)  Pablo's
phonology would be droped for a very weird one... one pronounced by some
speices with no labial-dental-alveolar-palatal-velar-uvular disctintions or
nasals.
A logical language (zero ambiguity, machine parseable) could be another way.
But I would like a language made by conlangers to be used by conlangers,
children of conlangers, close friends of conlangers, etc.  This language
doesn't need to be oversimplified for easy to learn.

This way the conculture is our net culture, and after Sally et al surveys,
Myers-Briggs' personality tests and so on, we know a little more on
ourselves.  (Any body took close note and would send us a summary.)

If thus, this language would allow us to discusse linguistics and give
examples... at least examples one cannot found in English.  Would allow us
to discusse history, measure systems, computer terminology, and everiday
life.

If this is going to be a net language I guess orthography is more important
than phonology.  We have 26 letters of Modern Latin (English) alphabet we
all can type in our keyboards and read in our emails.  I would vote to stick
to those letters and have no apostrophe or special mark (I like the & sign
in NGL but & is read form of "et" and only used as conjunction, never in the
middle of a word).

I love consonant clusters, after having try with a lot of projects with
strictly CV(N) or C(S)V(N), where (S) stands for aproximants, I would like
to come back to some clusters not difficult to pronounce... nothing like dij
Schdjarvk... but I would see no problems whit final /s/ /S/ /f/ /l/ /k/ and
what ever /r/ means.

Pronunciation of letters:
<a> as [a] [A] [&] or even [eI]  you choose acording to stress and next
sound.
<e> as [e] [E] [@]
<i> as [i] [I]
<o> as [o] [O] [C]...
<u> as [u] [V] [ju] ... unrounded if you preffer
<b> as [b] or [B]
<c> as [tS] [x] [ts] or positional: [k] and [s] or [x] and [S]
<d> as [d] or [D]
<f> as [f] or as voiceless [B]
<g> as [g] or [G]
<h> as [h] or [x] or silent.
<j> as [Z] [dZ] [j] [j\] even [x]
<k> as [k] either aspirated or not
<l> as the /l/ in your L1 natlang.
<m> as [m] or any other way, like devoicing it
<n> as [n] or [N]
<p> as [p], aspirated or not
<q> as [q] [x] [tS] [kw]
<r> what ever /r/ means to you
<s> as [s] [z]
<t> as /t/
<v> as [v] [B] [f]...
<w> as [w] [v], labial approximant...
<x> as [ks] [S] [x] [z]
<y> as [j] [j\] [Z] or very close [I]
<z> as [z] [Z] [ts] [T] [s]

In other words: completely free pronunciation, if you want to pronounce
consistily would be okay.

Even combinations would be free: _ai_ would be [aj] [aI] [eI] /a.i/ or what
ever.

Syllabe structure would be CSWF with W being one or two vouels, C any
consonant, S any easy combining consonant, and F any final consonand.  Only
W needed...

-- Carlos Th