Re: Introduction and a few novice questions

En réponse à Paul Edson <conlang@...>:

> Whee! A first post after lurking about for some time now.
> The erudition and imaginative fecundity of the contributors
> to this list are truly a joy. My thanks to Cristophe for
> setting me on the path to productivity when I couldn't post
> to the archival group at Yahoo!
>
You're welcome! (both in the metaphorical and original meaning :)) ) I'm glad
you finally made it here :) .

> Introduction first: I’m a strange mongrel mix… I do project
> management for a US Navy document management system during
> the day (as a contractor) and sing professionally (chorus
> and small roles) with the Washington Opera by night. I live
> in Maryland and am hoping to progress from ‘wannabe’ to
> ‘author’ in the next year or so. My knowledge of linguistics
> as a field is strictly self-acquired, and I certainly am
> blessed with what I'd like to think is a productive
> ignorance.
>
Like probably 80% of the people on this list :)) . I am myself a proud example
of this kind :)) .

>
> The question, then, is: What factors do you use  to allow
> you to narrow the range of  strategies/features you
> incorporate into your languages? How does one cope with such
> an embarrassing wealth of possibility?
>
Well, my conlangs always start with a simple idea, coming from something I've
read or heard, on this list or somewhere else. So the first idea is simple:
what if I used prefixes instead of suffixes as case mark? What about a language
that inflects only the last member of a phrase? What about a trigger language
with tones? What about a language with the most unintuitive orthography and
grammar possible, yet completely consistent and regular? Etc...

When I get this idea, it doesn't leave me, even if I wanted it to :)) . So in
my head, it builds around a kind of cocoon, made of sounds and features I want
to introduce. After a while (usually two weeks or so), the cocoon is big
enough. Time to make it into silk! :) So then I come up with a blank page, and
begin writing down the different features of the language: phonology,
morphology, grammar, etc... When a feature is written down, I don't change it
anymore. Even if I find it not that good anymore, I refrain from changing what
I've done, in order not to break the fragile balance I created (for that, I'm
better than Tolkien :)) ). One of the reasons I have so many languages which
are not more than grammars is that I constantly get new ideas, and since I
don't want to modify what I've already written down (except for details like
the orthography or some sounds), I'm obliged to start a new conlang for every
new feature I feel like trying :)) .

So as a short answer: I don't cope with the embarrassing wealth of possibility.
It's in fact the reason why I have an embarrassing wealth of conlang
projects :))) .

Christophe.

http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr

Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.