Re: LUNATIC SURVEY: 2005
| From: | Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Friday, February 25, 2005, 16:06 |
|---|
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 01:41:04PM -0500, Sally Caves wrote:
> 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")
My name is Mark Joseph Reed, which is obviously no pseudonym;
it's what's on my birth certificate. (I was named "Joseph"
after my grandfather Henry, of course.)
My invented languages are: Mephali, Shalakar, Okaikiar, and Curnalis.
>
> *2. Are you new to the Lunatic Survey or have you filled out a version
> of this survey before?
I here am new.
> 3. Do you have a website for you language/world(s)? If so, please list
> the URL address.
Only for Okaikiar so far:
http://thereeds.org/~mark/conlang/okaikiar
>
> 4. What is your email address? name at hostsite dot whatever.
markjreed at mail dot com
>
> 5. What is your age? (vague answers allowed, but it is an important
> demographic)
36. 37 on May 5, 2005.
>
> 6. What is your gender?
That depends on the language, but definitely animate and
masculine.
>
> 7. What is your nationality? Where do you live now?
USA to both.
> 8. What is your native language?
USAnian English
> 9. What natural languages foreign to you have you studied or do you
> speak?
Greatest fluency: Spanish
Others I've studied formally: French, German, Russian
Informally I've studied lots. From greatest to
least familiarity, something like this:
Italian, Latin, Japanese, Swedish, Norwegian
And I've learned a few basic phrases (hello, thank you)
and numbers in Korean, Amharic, Mandarin, Hebrew, Irish,
Welsh, and probably others I can't think of at the moment.
> 10. What is your level of education? i.e., your highest degree
> achieved or sought?
I have a Bachelor of Science in Information and Computer
Science from the Georgia Institute of Technology
(Georgia Tech).
> 11. What is your profession?
Information Technology professional. Specifically,
a Chief Engineer for Cable News Network and affiliated
websites.
> Are you a professional linguist?
No
(Note: there was no question 12)
> 13. If you are a student, what is your major or your area of study?
N/A
> 14. How long have you been developing your invented language(s)?
Mephali, about 25 years
Shalakar was a short-lived project about 15-20 years ago
Okaikiar, about 3 years
Curnalis, just a few months
> 15. At what age did you first start inventing a language? Can you
> briefly describe your early efforts?
About age 10. My first conlang was actually a cipher of
English, in which each letter was replaced by the following
letter of the same type (vowel/consonant) in alphabetical order.
Replacing vowels with vowels and consonants with consonants was
supposed to make the result pronouncible according to
approximately English phonetics, but as you can see from phrases
like "See Spot run" -> "Tii Tquv sap", that's not exactly the
case.
> 16. What drew you to start inventing a language and/or constructed
> world? What was the inspiration?
Originally, exchanging secret messages with friends. Later,
creating a background for a superhero character I created.
>
> 17. Did you start inventing before you had heard of the list or after?
Before.
> Before you had heard of Esperanto or Tolkien? (I name the two most
> common inspirations)
Before hearing about Esperanto. I may have read or at least seen
the animated version of _The_Hobbit_, but I hadn't yet read
the Lord of the Rings or learned about Tolkien's conlanging.
> 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 don't hide it, but I don't advertise it either. People go to
my website to see photos of my baby, then get curious and follow
the links. So my brother-in-law gets occasional incredulous
emails from his friends "Did you know your sister's husband has
HIS OWN LANGUAGE?!", and I'm a tad embarrassed.
> 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?
So far, nobody's thought I was a sociopath or mentally ill - at
least not seriously so. Just weird.
> *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?
Nerdy and sophisticated aren't mutually exclusive; I think most
nerdy pursuits are sophisticated. Conlanging is definitely one
of them.
> 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?
I play several instruments, none of them particularly well. I
do not sing. I have occasionally composed a song or two but not
often, and the results are pretty simple melodies.
> 22. There has been a connection noted between linguistic and
> mathematical ability. Are you mathematically inclined or inclined
> towards computing in any way?
Definitely. Do higher math for fun, and am a computer
professional.
> 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?)
In the past I've drawn, done calligraphy, played role playing
games, and written poetry; these days my major creative outlet
is the web.
> 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.
lostlangs
> 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)?
All 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?
Mephali and Shalakar both have alphabetic scripts, which are not
online. Okaikiar has a script built on similar principles to
Hangul, described on the web page given above. For Curnalis I'm
working on an abugida.
> 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.
Mephali is OV, analytic, agglutinating;
Shalakar, Okaikiar, and Curnalis are OV, analytic, inflectional,
with some agglutinating features; all are accusative. Nothing
terribly novel there.
I think the most innovative feature of the lot is Okaikiar's
spatial/temporal unification. There is only one word for,
e.g., "point in time" and "position in space", ditto for
"where"/"when", "here"/"now", etc. When necessary,
spatial or temporal intent can be indicated by explicit
prefixes. When applied to words which don't have inherently
spatial or temporal meaning, these prefixes modify the meaning
in other conventional ways. For instance, "kaikiar" is the
common noun "speech", while "Okaikiar" - the "o-" is the explicit
temporal particle - is the name of the language.
> 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?
None of them is particularly extensive. Okaikiar has the
largest vocabulary with about 250 roots. I'm in the process
of translating the McGuffey Reader into Curnalis, which didn't
exist until I started that project, so it may wind up the
most usable of the languages in short order.
> 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.
Mephali is the descendant of my original enciphered-English
language; I generate roots for it by applying a simple transform
to a related word in English, or sometimes another natlang if
that lang has a simple word for something that's cumbersome in
English.
For Okaikiar and Shalakar, I create(d) roots randomly, via computer
software.
For Curnalis, I just pull words out of the air, as you say.
> 3. Does a constructed world accompany your invention(s)? What is it
> called?
Yes. It is a planet called Dankar. And why is a question
between 8 and 9 numbered 3?
> *9. Has your language and conworld ever served in a role-playing game
> or a world shared by other conlangers?
A character from my conworld has appeared in a few different
role-playing games.
> *10. Briefly describe your conculture (is it within the bounds of this
> world? on another world, etc.?)
On another world, as I said. Humans transplanted from Earth by aliens
many thousands of years ago. One tribe conquered the entire
planet and managed to retain control for about 4,000 years, during
which time they developed highly advanced technology. A schism arose
regarding extraplanetary expansion, there was a military coup,
and at the present time there is an ongoing civil war.
> *11. Are the beings who speak your invented language human or alien?
Human.
> 12. What do you write in it? Poems? chants? lullabyes? prayers?
> history? stories? recipes? Are any of these exhibited on your website?
Mostly snippets of dialogue for use in writing the
aforementioned character's backstory.
> 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? :)
No to all of the above. :)
> 14. Have you made any soundbytes of your language? Could you provide
> me at a later date with a sample of them?
I haven't, but I certainly could do so.
> *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? Im thinking,
> of course, of Etabnannery, for those who remember it.
The Roman transliterations are all very conventional.
> 16. How many of you sing in your language and have invented songs for
> that purpose?
I did develop a Dankaran musical system based on different intervals,
but I have yet to compose anything in it.
> *17. How many of you, for entertainment or any other reason, resort to
> gibberish? (This is in response to Adrian Morgans question in
> December). Does it give you ideas for conlanging? (Have you ever
> fooled anyone?) How many of you have sung gibberish?
I routinely curse in gibberish. People tend to assume it's
Klingon.
> *18. What on-line games do you play? (or devise?) Translations,
> Babel-text, Relays, etc.
I've participated in one relay, and it was fun, though
stressful. (I don't do deadlines very well) I've translated
the Babel Text, and as I said I'm working on the McGuffey Reader
in Curnalis.
> 19. Which do you prefer doing: devising phonology? script? structure?
> building vocabulary?
Obviously not vocabulary, or (a) I wouldn't have made it
nearly automatic for 2 out of my 3 conlangs, and (b) I'd have
more than 250 roots in the largest. Structure first, script
second; phonology and vocabulary are not quite at the level of
necessary evils, but not far above.
> 20. Do you start and stop several different conlangs, or do you tend
> to stick with one and develop it over years?
Both. Mephali has kept the same name for 25 years but I don't
think it's maintained any other consistent features for any
significant period of time. It's very fluid.
> 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 dont you?
I get bored with a particular conlang and switch to a different
one, but I do eventually come back. I don't think there's such
a thing as a complete language, con or nat, but a language
that's usable for everyday conversation is a goal.
Unfortunately, that involves that annoying vocabulary creation
stuff.
> *22. Which came first: the conlang or the conworld?
Tough call. The cipher came first; treating it as an actual
language came after the conworld.
> C. PHILOSOPHY AND AESTHETIC:
>
> 1. What aesthetic features do you value in inventing language? Be
> specific as to phonology, structure, script, etc.
I have an irrational fondness for inflection, especially
nominal morphologies with lots and lots of cases. At the
same time, my programmer's mentality leads me to design
inflections that are really built out of agglutinations.
> 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.
None consciously. I do try to make sure my language won't be
readily mistaken for another.
> 3. Is difficulty or obscurity a goal in inventing a language?
Nope.
> 4. Is efficiency a goal in inventing a language? This question neednt
> cancel out the previous one.
Not a conscious one. Again, than my natural tendencies as a
programmer tend toward efficiency despite my best intentions,
however.
> 5. How natural do you wish to make it, or is that a concern? Or
> rather, how unnatural do you wish to make it?
My conlangs are all intended to be natlangs, so naturality is
a goal. I don't mind having features that are unlikely in a
natlang, but I try to minimize them.
> 6. Can conlanging be sexy? sensual? obsessing? how does it heal or
> harm you?
Obsessing, sure. Sexy or sensual, no. It's just . . . fun.
> *7. How many of you have developed a rich vocabulary of obscenities?
A few invectives, but not many. Shalakar is probably unique in
that, thanks to a college friend messing around with my
vocabulary generator, a simple root noun for the insult
"yogurthead".
> 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?
Nope. Mysticism and spirituality and me do not mix at all.
I have used Mephali as a "language of magic" in an RPG, though.
> 9. How many of you have developed a rich vocabulary of magical,
> religious, or incantatory terms?
Mephali had incantatory terms for the above RPG, although that
is an obsolete version of the language now, not even a
conhistorical ancestor of the current one.
> *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?
A few such words may fall out of the Okaikiaran temporal/spatial
indication, but it wasn't a goal.
> 11. Name a few of the words in your language(s) that you are most
> pleased with and are the most original to you.
I like the sound of "ledlilzan", which is Okaikiar for "to
blush". And, as I said, it's cool that Shalakar has
a simple word for "yogurthead" ("yagwa").
>
> 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 dont you care?
I always try several things - in the case of Mephali, I try running
different source words through the transofrm; in the case of the -kars,
I typically run the generator multiple times and pick the
best-sounding one. But I couldn't tell you what criteria I use
to judge.
> *13. Do you ever rely on a software program to build vocabulary? Do
> those who dont think thats cheating? :)
Yup. See above.
> *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?
It is certainly a hobby. And I don't get the distinction between
"art" and "craft" here - there is some art in anything involving
creation.
> *15. If it is, who do you think are its consumers?
Us, of course. We appreciate our own work and that of our
fellow conlangers . .
> *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?
I'm a recovered full-bore Esperantist, and it certainly can be a
political tool. The choice of language to use for
communication, while usually chosen out of sheer practicality,
is always fraught with political implications.
> *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?
I think the expansion says it best: constructed language.
Anything else gets too specific and winds up leaving out some
conlangs.
> *18. Why or why not would you eschew the metaphors "miniature" or
> "model"?
How do you model a language? You can perhaps model a grammatical
structure by reducing it to its simplest form, but in general
the analogy breaks down. And while many conlangs have miniature
or even minuscule vocabularies compared to natlangs, that's only
because they're not complete, whereas a miniature is complete
at its mini size.
> *19. Is a conlang more like a glimpse of something lifesize? (Irinas
> suggestion in 2001)
That is perhaps a good analogy. Somewhere out there in the
Platonic ideosphere, my conlangs exist as whole languages and
are used for everday communication by sentients. :)
> *20. There has been some invigorating discussion lately about what a
> conlang can do that most natural languages dont (such as produce OSV
> structure, or eradicate verbs) What experiments have you made with
> your artlang(s) along these lines?
I experimented with stack-based syntax, before discovering Fith
(ACADEWism, I suppose)...
> *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?
Depends on how thoroughly you want to fool the linguist.
I don't think it's hard to create a language that at first blush
appears to be a natlang/lostlang, but making one that survives
detailed analysis, that fits into the family tree (or explicitly
fails to, utterly), that strikes me as tough.
> *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?
Lots. My primary interest in languages is learning how they
work; making my own is secondary.
> *23. Can such a language function?
An unnatural language? Sure. Doesn't Klingon violate a few
of the Greenberg Universals?
> *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?
Don't care. :)
> D. THE LISTSERV
>
> 1. How did you first hear of this list?
I don't even remember.
>
> 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 originally found conlang back in the late 90s, but was only here
briefly. Got back on in 2001 or 2002 and have mostly been on
since.
> *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 ?
Always nice to have knowledgeable people to bounce ideas off of.
Judging by the number of times I exceed my quota, I'd say I
contribute excessively.
> *5. How helpful has the list been in developing your language? In
> learning linguistic information?
I've definitely learned more linguistics from conlang than from
classes or sci.lang. And gotten plenty of ideas for my
languages.
> 6. What books have you consulted? On your own, or because you heard
> of them on the list?
World's Writing Systems for scripts. The History of the Spanish
Language and Posner's Romance Languages entry in the Cambridge
series, for how languages change over time. Books on
Indo-European and Ancient Egyptian linguistics. John Cowan's
"red book" on Lojban. Pinker's work on language in general;
lots and lots of books, mostly found on my own.
> *7. Do you peruse the websites of other conlangers?
yup.
> *8. Do you sense that people on this list are interested in your
> conlang and give you feedback on it?
In those rare instances when I'm actually talking about my
conlangs, yes. But I spend relatively little time on them,
usually asking or answering (sometimes-)relevant queries...
> 9. Have you ever set out to learn at least a little bit of someones
> conlang, if only a word or two, or a phrase?
I've participated in a relay, but I've never retained much of
anyone else's conlang. Or my own, for that matter.
> *10. Do you peruse Jeffrey Hennings Langmaker.com site?
No. I should.
> *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?
All of my online "showcasing" is hand-coded. The Okaikiar
script, for instance, is a Ruby program using the GD module
to create images dynamically using drawing primitives
("draw a line from (x1,y1) to (x2,y2)"; "draw a rectangle";
"fill with this color",e tc.)
> 12. Have you ever tried to introduce a friend to the list?
Ha, no.
> 13. Do you know of anyone who does this kind of thing but who has
> never heard of the list?
nope.
> *14. What other lists do you frequent related to conlanging?
tlhingan-hol is related, sort of.
> *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?
More subscribers makes it better. At least to a point, which we haven't
reached yet.
> *16. What Internet technology would you most like to see developed
> that would aid you in showcasing your language(s)?
Better free font creation software would be great.
> *17. What lists like conlang exist in other cultures and languages
> that you know of?
I dunno.
> *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?
It certainly deserves respect, but I don't care if "the world"
knows about us.
> *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 Salamons 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
> Ive met with and aimed at criticizing introversion or solipsism), how
> would you answer?
I've been told point-blank that by not being a professional
linguist and, specifically, engaging in the language
conservation movement, I am wasting my talents and interest.
And that was by someone who didn't even know about the
conlanging! My only answer is that what I do, I do for my own
enjoyment, and what I learn, I learn for the same reason.
My responsibility is to myself, my family, my country even, but
not to Linguistics(TM). Besides, fieldwork doesn't fit into my
life, and linguistics jobs don't pay nearly as well as IT. :)
> *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 closed. We live in the world of standardization.
Between broadcast media and computers (every new language
requires localization packages to get your favorite software to
speak that language, and most of the cutting edge stuff is only
available in one language, usually English), the resistance to
new languages is, I think, higher than ever. Even though
people predicted that the Internet would make Esperanto more
attractive.
> *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?
Definitely not. Language invention is only respectable within
the community of language inventors; we are lucky enough to be
able to connect with others of our kind, but to the world at
large, what we do still looks like a colossal waste of time.
> *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?
I think history shows that conlanging is not in danger of
dying out anytime soon. Despite Tolkien, I doubt
it will ever become respectable to the world at large, but
even if it did, I don't think it'd ever reach the point of
banality.
> 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?
Sure, use it all. Full name is fine - anyone who knows who I am
already knows how weird I am. And I don't plan any future in
politics. :)