Re: LUNATIC SURVEY: 2005
| From: | Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, February 24, 2005, 23:11 |
|---|
> A. PROFESSION, DEMOGRAPHICS, INCLINATION:
>
> 1. Who are you, and what is the name of your invented language or languages?
> Pseudonyms allowed. (Are you using one? asked "Sally Caves")
I'm Andreas Johansson. I've made a number of more-or-less fleshed-out conlangs;
the ones most familiar to members of the CONLANG list will be Tairezazh and
Meghean.
> *2. Are you new to the Lunatic Survey or have you filled out a version of
> this survey before?
I believe I took part in an earlier one some years ago.
> 3. Do you have a website for you language/world(s)? If so, please list the
> URL address.
http://andjo.free.fr/conlang/
(The article on Meghean is fairly heavily out-of-date. I really should be
updating it one of these days.)
> 4. What is your email address? name at hostsite dot whatever.
andjo at free dot fr
> 5. What is your age? (vague answers allowed, but it is an important
> demographic)
23.
> 6. What is your gender?
Male (appropriately enough, given my given name!).
> 7. What is your nationality? Where do you live now?
Swedish. I live in the Swedish city of Linköping.
> 8. What is your native language?
Swedish.
> 9. What natural languages foreign to you have you studied or do you speak?
English and German.
> 10. What is your level of education? i.e., your highest degree achieved or
> sought?
I'm in the fourth year of a civil engineer university programme.
> 11. What is your profession? Are you a professional linguist? If so, what
> also makes you a conlanger?
Student.
> 13. If you are a student, what is your major or your area of study?
Technical physics and electrotechnics, specialized towards language (German) and
mathematics.
> 14. How long have you been developing your invented language(s)?
Since '97 in the case of Tairezazh, since '03 for Meghean.
> 15. At what age did you first start inventing a language? Can you briefly
> describe your early efforts?
In my early teens, the alternate worlds I've been dreaming up for as long as I
can remember started to have more and more linguistic content, which led to the
creation various naming languages (the one I recall anything much of today was
known as Cyran [SY'ran]). At 15, I got started on Tairezazh, the first to have
an actual grammar.
> 16. What drew you to start inventing a language and/or constructed world?
> What was the inspiration?
I do not know what made me start making conworlds. As said, I have been doing it
for as long as I can remember. Maybe I got the idea from the alternate realities
presented in children's TV shows and books.
I was driven to add linguistic content to them by a combination of three
factors; 1) a desire to increase their internal consistency and independence by
consistent naming of places, people, and artefacts, 2) fascination with
Tolkien's invented universe, which of course prominently features languages,
and 3) an awakening interest in linguistics and an desire to do something
creative with the knowledge I gained in the pursuit of this interest.
> 17. Did you start inventing before you had heard of the list or after? Before
> you had heard of Esperanto or Tolkien? (I name the two most common
> inspirations)
I started inventing before I knew of the list; I was invited here after
mentioning it on Elfling, mailinglist devoted to Tolkien's languages. I knew of
both Tolkien's effort and of Esperanto before I began conlanging, but only the
former served as an inspiration. I have little interest in auxlangs.
> 18. Tolkien calls it a "shy art" and a "secret vice"; but that was before the
> Internet. How secret do you keep it from others outside this list for much
> the same reasons?
I simply never speak of it IRL. I do not make any particular effort to keep it
secret, but by its very nature the hobby doesn't exactly advertize itself
either, unless you actively tell people about it. Some friends of me know I
experiment with grammatical and orthographical systems, and I once told a woman
friend a bit about Meghean, but no-one I know IRL has any idea how much time and
effort I've spent on it.
This low-profile attitude is largely due to the less-than-enthusiastic attitude
towards "fantasy worlds" I encountered as a kid. Most adults and other kids
seemed to think it was at best a stupid waste of time, at worst a sign of
mental deviancy. Naturally, I became unwilling to draw attention to it, and I
have kept the same attitude towards conlangs (which for me never exist
independent of an invented world).
> 19. Yaguello has called it "pathological," influenced, unfortunately, by a
> lot of psychiatric writings such as _Le Schizo et la langue_. To what extent
> have you encountered such reactions by outsiders you had taken into your
> confidence?
None at all, wrt conlangs per se. Since I've never really taken anyone outside
the online conlanger community into confidence on this, that should not be
surprising. About the only exception was the woman friend I mentioned above,
who reacted positively.
As said, I've encountered wrt conworlds, however. It seems to be a fairly widely
held opinion.
> *20. Do you consider it nerdy to be doing this? This is a term that gets
> tossed around a lot. Or actually sophisticated? Do you need to get a life, or
> is this your life? What is a life?
I think conlanging is highly nerdy, and that it, like many nerdy things, is also
quite sophisticated.
As for getting a life, I have better things to do.
> 21. There has been a connection noted between linguistic and musical ability.
> Are you musically inclined? Do you sing and/or play a musical instrument? Do
> you compose music?
No, I'm not musically inclined. I do have this tendency to sing along with
lyrics on the radio and the like, but I don't think anyone'd say I sing *good*.
I did once try to learn to play the flute, for which I showed a remarkable lack
of talent, and I do not compose music.
> 22. There has been a connection noted between linguistic and mathematical
> ability. Are you mathematically inclined or inclined towards computing in any
> way?
I'm highly mathematically inclined, even by the standards of technology students
on a mathematically heavy uni programme.
> 23. What other passions do you pursue that give you creative pleasure?
> (painting, drawing, sculpting, calligraphy, model-building, novel or
> story-writing, role-playing games, map-making, book-making, poetry,
> web-designing, star-gazing or other?)
I used to build model airplanes and role-playing. I'm involved in the creative
(non-programming) side of computer games design.
> B. FEATURES OF YOUR INVENTION
>
> 1. Pick the best term for the invented language you are currently invested
> in: auxlang, artlang, engelang, loglang, lostlang, philosophical language, or
> "other." etc.
All my conlangs are artlangs.
> 2. Is your conlang a priori (devised from scratch) or a posteriori (based on
> an existing natural language or drawing from a language class such as
> Semitic)?
Chiefly a priori.
> 4. Do you have a script for your conlang? What is it called? Could you
> provide me at a later date with a sample of it? Is it on Langmaker's
> "neography" site?
I've made a script for Tairezazh, called the Maidzhen Klaish. The most recent
version is presented on my website. I'm not particularly happy with it, and may
one day redo it more-or-less from scratch.
> 5. Briefly describe the outlines of your invented language (syntactical
> structure--VO, OV, etc.; class or type--analytic, synthetic, agglutinating,
> incorporative, accusative, ergative, active, trigger, other, combinations,
> etc.), noting what you have done with it that is innovative in your opinion.
Tairezazh: SVO, agglutinating, accusative, tense-based verbal inflection. No
particularly innovative features.
Meghean: SVO, mutational*, accusative, aspect-based verbal inflection. The
mutations are probably the most innovative bit.
* It's not agglutinating in the usual sense of the word, since you can't break
down words into a number of sequential morphemes each with an identifiable
meaning, and it's not fusional in the usual sense either, since each
modification usually does only indicate one category.
> 7. How extensive would you say your invented language is, now? How big the
> vocabulary? Do you provide a vocabulary list or taxonomy on your website if
> you have one?
Vocabulary was never my strong point. Tairezazh is probably in the mid-hundreds
of lexical entries, Meghean in the low hundreds.
> 8. How do you build vocabulary? Some people pull words out of the air; others
> build up a base of root words and affixes. Many do both.
I pull them out of thin air. I often spend considerable time agonizing whether
sound fits meaning; this is a big reason my conlangs grow so slowly.
> 3. Does a constructed world accompany your invention(s)? What is it called?
Yes; each of my conlangs reside in one invented world or another. The worlds do
not have names; as far as their inhabitants are concerned, they are "the
universe", and the inhabitants do not feel any more need for a specific name
for their world than we do for our universe. Of course, I could give them
"external" names, but I feel little need for that.
> *9. Has your language and conworld ever served in a role-playing game or a
> world shared by other conlangers?
Not beyond me giving RPG characters names drawn from my conlangs.
I've however *invented* a number of worlds specifically for roleplaying. Non of
these have had any serious linguistic content, however.
> *10. Briefly describe your conculture (is it within the bounds of this world?
> on another world, etc.?)
Tairezazh is the language of a human culture in an "alternate future"; a
universe were humanity has expanded out across the galaxy.
Meghean is the language of an elven people in a Fantasy world. Basically
medieval wrt technology and societal structure, with various sentient races,
magic, the works, essentially.
> *11. Are the beings who speak your invented language human or alien? If
> alien, what features have you given the language to make it alien or how have
> you restricted or expanded its phonology? vocabulary?
The Tairezans are humans.
The Meghean-speakers are elves. Their biological differences from humans are
quite minor, however, and the language does not have any particularly features.
> 12. What do you write in it? Poems? chants? lullabyes? prayers? history?
> stories? recipes? Are any of these exhibited on your website?
I rarely write any longer pieces of text in my conlangs; I mostly write short
pieces of dialog, sayings, fictitious famours quotes, and the like. My website
has a Meghean translation of the Pater Noster.
> 13. Can you speak your conlang? Are you fluent in it? Is this a goal for you?
> Have you tried to teach it to an intimate? a companion animal? :)
I cannot speak any of my conlangs, and I've never tried to achieve fluency. I
can read Tairezazh and Meghean without looking in the dictionary most of the
time.
> 14. Have you made any soundbytes of your language? Could you provide me at a
> later date with a sample of them?
No, and I don't have any recording gear either.
> *15. If you use Roman script, how recognizably "phonetic" is your writing
> system? In other words, do you use unconventional letters or letter
> combinations to represent sounds? Why or why not? I'm thinking, of course, of
> Etabnannery, for those who remember it.
The Tairezan script is quite phonetic, and the romanization, of course, is
equally so.
Meghean writing is decidedly non-trivial. I feel it's too ambiguous to be
accused of etabnannery, however!
> 16. How many of you sing in your language and have invented songs for that
> purpose?
Not me.
> *17. How many of you, for entertainment or any other reason, resort to
> gibberish? (This is in response to Adrian Morgan's question in December).
> Does it give you ideas for conlanging? (Have you ever fooled anyone?) How
> many of you have sung gibberish?
I'm not sure what this about. I can fluently speak meaningless syllables, and
sometimes do, if that's what you mean. It doesn't help me with conlanging, and
I don't think I've ever fooled anyone with it - I assume you mean made someone
think it's an actual language?
I not infrequently invent words on the spot and use in conversation, their
meaning usually clear from context and known morphemes present in them. On a
couple of occasions it's turned out the invented word was actually identically
to a preexisting word of the same meaning which I was unaware of; this has been
word made out of graeco-latin "scientific" morphemes.
> *18. What on-line games do you play? (or devise?) Translations, Babel-text,
> Relays, etc.
Relays, translation exercises, word assocation, hangman.
> 19. Which do you prefer doing: devising phonology? script? structure?
> building vocabulary?
Phonology, followed by structure.
> 20. Do you start and stop several different conlangs, or do you tend to stick
> with one and develop it over years?
I start new ones now and then. Most eventually go into hibernation, some are
effectively dead since I've lost my notes on them. My first "real" conlang,
Tairezazh, is still active.
> 21. What do you think makes a "complete" conlang, if a conlang can attain
> completion? What are your goals for completion? When do you grow "tired" of
> your conlang, or don't you?
A complete conlang would be one which could be used in everyday life. Like with
natlangs, there is no point where they can't continue to gain vocabulary, of
coruse.
I do not think any of my conlangs will ever attain that level of completion, and
am fine with that. How long it takes for me to grow tired of a conlang is highly
variable; Tairezazh is still active eight years on, Yargish received alot of
work for a short period and has since hardly been touched, and Telenzh has been
worked at at a very slow pace for half a decade and still hasn't reached more
completion than Yargish had after a week. It started out in almost-hibernation
and has so remained.
> *22. Which came first: the conlang or the conworld?
Usually the conworld.
> C. PHILOSOPHY AND AESTHETIC:
>
> 1. What aesthetic features do you value in inventing language? Be specific as
> to phonology, structure, script, etc.
Clearly, there are some classes of sound I am more attracted to than others, but
my chief aesthetic goal wrt phonology is that it should form a harmonic whole.
My conlangs unfailingly have highly symmetric inventories. Syllable structure
tends to be moderately to fairly complex (Tairezazh has words like _kstrol_); I
don't like CV languages.
As regards strucure, I don't like isolation. I tend to SVO or SOV syntax. Most
of my conlangs are accusative.
I don't have any particular aesthetical preferences wrt scripts.
> 2. What commonly applied aesthetics have you ever tried to avoid in your
> invention? This has been an oft debated question, especially when it comes to
> Tolkien.
Tairezazh was originally intended to be fairly harsh in sound. I don't think it
really succeeded in that - if I were to design a phonology with that goal
today, it would certainly have alot more [qX]'s* - but I'm fairly happy with
the result, and it certainly doesn't sound like Quenya or Sindarin, the
artlangs I was familiar with at the time.
Meghean was deliberately disigned to have a stereotypical "elvish" sound; I took
Sindarin as a kind of standard of elvishness. I like to think I managed to
create something that looks and sounds "elvish" to those of us familiar with
tolkienoid Fantasy, yet has also a character of its own.
* Latest idea added to the bitz box: [N\qX-] as 1st sg marker on verbs.
> 3. Is difficulty or obscurity a goal in inventing a language?
Sometimes. The various deficiencies of Meghean writing are pretty much all
perfectly intentional.
> 4. Is efficiency a goal in inventing a language? This question needn't cancel
> out the previous one.
I'm not sure what efficiency means here. I'm not aiming to maximize the
bits/phoneme ratio.
> 5. How natural do you wish to make it, or is that a concern? Or rather, how
> unnatural do you wish to make it?
Perferably, my langs should be able to pass for (imperfectly recorded) natlangs.
> 6. Can conlanging be sexy? sensual? obsessing? how does it heal or harm you?
Sexy? I don't get a hard-on by inventing grammatical categories if that's what
you mean!
Conlanging is, for me at least, a decidedly intellectual hobby. One might be
obsessed by it, but I don't think I am. I don't think it heals or harms me in
any physical sense, but, like any intellectual activity, it helps keeping your
brain in working order.
> *7. How many of you have developed a rich vocabulary of obscenities?
Not me.
> 8. Can it be mystical? To what extent does conlanging fulfill a spiritual
> purpose for you? Or a magical one? Did it ever start out that way?
No, none, no, no.
I'm a highly unmystical person.
> 9. How many of you have developed a rich vocabulary of magical, religious, or
> incantatory terms?
Not me.
> *10. How many of you have striven to invent words that express novel ideas,
> or are not expressed in any natural language that you know?
Not as a goal in itself, but conculturing pretty much invariably creates
concepts that do not have a specific term for them in one's native language,
perhaps not in any. A political structure quite like the Meghean _camath_ has
never existed in our world; naturally we don't have a special term for it.
> 11. Name a few of the words in your language(s) that you are most pleased
> with and are the most original to you.
"Meghean" (pronounced [me'Zan]) itself is perhaps the most beautiful word in
Meghean. I much like it. I also like _creach_ [krjax] "castle", the very first
Meghean word to be invented, and _sheomear_ ['hjomjar] "the creator" (did I say
the orthography is non-trivial?).
The best Tairezazh word is undoubtedly _stelza_ "girl".
The defining word of Yargish is _yarg_ "orkish warrior".
> 12. How do you sense that a word is "right" for its meaning? How much do you
> labor at fitting a sound to its sense? Or don't you care?
I often spend considerable time agonizng about fitting meaning to sound. *How* I
sense I've finally got it right is hard to say.
> *13. Do you ever rely on a software program to build vocabulary? Do those who
> don't think that's cheating? :)
*I* wouldn't do it, but if someone else does, that's their problem!
> *14. Is conlang a hobby, a craft, or an art in your mind? This has been hotly
> debated, so the question is not as weird as it seems. Can conlanging be
> considered an art? Why or why not?
I don't normally see hobby, craft, and art as mutually exclusive. I'd say it's
an hobby and an art.
Conlanging, for me, is a creative endeavor to be judged on aesthetical grounds.
If that's not an art, what is?
> *15. If it is, who do you think are its consumers?
Consumers? I'm not sure what your asking here, really, but I conlang for me.
I'll present (some of) my work to you lot, and appreciate your feedback, but
what ultimately matters is what I think about it.
> *16. This question is directed as well at any auxlangers on the list. Is it
> an art, a political tool, both? And who do you think could be its consumers?
My conlangs, of course, have not political intent whatsoever.
> *17. There has been some exciting talk recently (and over the years) about
> what a conlang is or is not. If you could pick a metaphor or write a
> descriptive phrase defining "conlang," what would that be?
"A conlang is a language that has been developed consciously by one or a few
individuals rather than developing 'organically' from a prior language."
End of discussion. :p
> *18. Why or why not would you eschew the metaphors "miniature" or "model"?
I don't see how a conlang in any meaningful sense are "miniatures". Compared to
natlangs, they're not *small* but (usually) *incomplete* and *non-complex*.
I'm more sympathetic to "model"; conlangs, indeed, generally lack the complexity
of natlangs (not necessarily in terms of *grammatical* complexity, but to my
knowledge unfailingly with respect to dialects, registers, etc, etc).
> *19. Is a conlang more like a glimpse of something lifesize? (Irina's
> suggestion in 2001)
Yes, at least for the kind of artlangs I'm interested in. Meghean isn't like a
natlang in its full complexity and expressibility, but could, I hope, be
mistaken for fragments of a such language.
> *20. There has been some invigorating discussion lately about what a conlang
> can do that most natural languages don't (such as produce OSV structure, or
> eradicate verbs) What experiments have you made with your artlang(s) along
> these lines?
Not much. I've included some features, like Meghean's consonantal mutations to
indicate definiteness, for which I knew no anadewism at the time (in fact, I've
still not seen any natlang doing something closely similar to that one), but
it's always been because it seemed like a good idea at the time, not because of
a desire to explore unusual features qua unusual features.
> *21 What do you think distinguishes a conlang from a natural language, if
> you think so at all? What would it take for a linguist to be fooled into
> thinking a conlang was a natural language?
To answer the second first, primarily suitable documentation. If I could
convince a linguist that my pieces came from ancient inscriptions, I don't
think it would be very hard to pass it off as a fragmentary ancient language.
I don't think there is any *necessary* properties that separates conlangs from
natlangs. No doubt, however, they're prone to be more regular and "neat" than
natlangs, and there are probably other similar tendencies.
> *22. How much do you study other languages in order to discover what is
> natural in language? Or to discover how you can stretch the boundaries of
> language to make it do things that are unnatural?
Not much for those purposes. To the extent the study of natlangs is for
conlanging at all, it's chiefly about inspiration, showing me new ways of doing
things. If I think up some neat feature that I wonder if it occurs somewhere, I
might ask on the list if anyone's heard of anything like it, but I won't make
any serious research of my own.
> *23. Can such a language function?
Can what kind of language function?
> *24. There has been quite a bit of fascinating debate about the relevance of
> conlanging to linguistic study. We all know that linguistics can aid
> conlangers, but in what ways can conlangers aid linguists? Or does it matter?
I don't think conlanging has much to offer natlang linguistics.
On a very elementary level, it could be used to introduce students to new
lingusistic phenomena; we could, frex, make an ergative version of English
(let's call it Englasque) to help students familiarize themselves with
ergativity.
> D. THE LISTSERV
>
> 1. How did you first hear of this list?
Daniel Andreasson invited me after I mentioned Tairezazh on the Elfling
mailinglist (dedicated to Tolkienian linguistics).
> 2. How long have you been on this listserv or on other related listservs?
> Continuously? Infrequently? Off and on? More off than on and vice versa?
I made my first post to the list on Feb 3rd 2001, so I've been here for just
over four years, practically continuously (just some short breaks for vacation
trips and the like).
> *3. What is the appeal of being on a listserv and contributing to it? Do you
> think you contribute moderately or excessively, or not enough? Do you tend to
> lurk ?
The appeal is simple; discussing interesting things with knowledgeable people.
That you lot are quite nice doesn't hurt.
While I, for Real Life reasons, been uncharacteristically quiet lately, I'm
clearly more prone to excessive posting than to excessive silence. Lurking is
entirely contrary to my personality.
> *4. For those of you who remember its inception, how has it changed over the
> past decade?
NA.
> *5. How helpful has the list been in developing your language? In learning
> linguistic information?
Muchly. It's my chief source of both conlangy inspiration and linguistic
knowledge.
> 6. What books have you consulted? On your own, or because you heard of them
> on the list?
Mostly linguistics textbooks. Probably none that more than a handful of people
here have heard of.
> *7. Do you peruse the websites of other conlangers?
Sometimes.
> *8. Do you sense that people on this list are interested in your conlang and
> give you feedback on it?
Yes.
> 9. Have you ever set out to learn at least a little bit of someone's conlang,
> if only a word or two, or a phrase?
Yes. My own excluded, the conlang I know the best is Quenya, of which I know
enough to write short texts.
> *10. Do you peruse Jeffrey Henning's Langmaker.com site?
Checked it out once or twice.
> *11. What on-line techniques do you use to showcase your conlang, such as
> Audacity or other sound programs, Dreamweaver, Illustrator, Fontography, and
> so forth? Did you hear of them on the list?
None.
> 12. Have you ever tried to introduce a friend to the list?
No.
> 13. Do you know of anyone who does this kind of thing but who has never heard
> of the list?
No.
> *14. What other lists do you frequent related to conlanging?
I'm on TolkLang (which is *very* quiet these days) and Lambengolmor (Hostetter's
tolkienistics list).
> *15. What do you think will be the future of the list? I see it giving birth
> to alternate lists like Conworld, Lostlanguages, Romlang, etc. What improves
> the present list and its helpfulness or entertainment value?
I think and hope the List will remain much as it is.
> *16. What Internet technology would you most like to see developed that would
> aid you in showcasing your language(s)?
No idea.
> *17. What lists like conlang exist in other cultures and languages that you
> know of?
Apart from the Russian and Spanish lists that figure in Yitzik's reviews, none.
> *18. There has been some terrific talk about CONLANG as a community. And yet
> so many of us seem to want the world to know of it and respect it. Is the
> CONLANG community enough?
I do not have any particular desire to see conlanging getting more media
attention.
> *19. In my 2000 on-line article
> (
http://journal.media-culture.org.au/0003/languages.php) I suggested that the
> Internet "may provide a site that, with the impetus of competition and
> showmanship, encourages inutile and obsessive activity"; I was quoting Jeff
> Salamon's article "Revenge of the Fanboys." Village Voice 13 Sep., 1994. He
> wrote that over ten years ago. Do outsiders still entertain such notions, do
> you think, about listservs like this one? Do you? To what extent has the list
> increased obsessive development in you? Would you be inventing as furiously
> as you are without the list or knowledge of other inventors?
> 20. If asked whether it is not better to turn your linguistic talents to the
> learning and speaking of natural languages (a common response I've met with
> and aimed at criticizing introversion or solipsism), how would you answer?
I don't conlang *instead* of learning foreign languages. I conlang *and* learn
foreign languages, the later with better success than most people.
> *21. In Elizabethan times there were the inkhorn neologisms. There were
> ciphers and pasigraphies. Today there is conlanging. Do you think the
> contemporary world is more open to language innovation or more closed?
Probably more open. The conception of "normality" has become wider.
> *22. What would Tolkien have done with such a community? He writes in "A
> Secret Vice" that language inventors "hardly ever show their works to one
> another, so none of them know who are the geniuses at the game, or who are
> the splendid 'primitives'." He suggests that perhaps in a later time language
> invention will become respectable, and such things can be exhibited. Have we
> reached that time?
There can be little doubt that inter-conlanger contacts are more common today
than in the Professors day. As for "respectability", well, the social reaction
to "I invent languages" still isn't the same as that to "I do oil paintings".
> *23. Is there a danger that over-exposure can make conlanging "banal"? To
> what extent is it exciting because it is a) considered disreputable, "corny"
> or "mad," or b) largely unknown to the world? Does it have a fizzle-out date?
> In other words, is it just a fad, or is it a natural human inclination that
> will stand the test of time?
While I do not have any particular desire for conlanging to become mainstream, I
don't see any particular threat in it either. I certainly do not, when inventing
verbal inflection tables, experience the tintilation of making something
forbidden.
I don't think conlanging is a "fad". Perhaps, should it receive considerable and
positive media attention, it would experience a faddish pike in popularity with
alot people taking it up only to abandon it for the next trend next year, but I
think there'll always remain a "hard core" of enthusiasts that will plod on
constructing ergative languages with nasalized clicks irrespective of the
trendiness of doing so.
> Finally, may I have your permission to use any of this material of yours for
> my academic work on conlanging? First name? last name? pseudonym? anonymous?
You have my permission. Feel free to use my name; it's known to anyone
sufficiently interested in conlanging to know the List anyway.
Andreas