Re: Conlang labels (wasR: Futurese, Chinese, Hz of NatLangs, etc.)

Christophe Grandsire writes:
 > En réponse à Tim May <butsuri@...>:
 >
 > >
 > > I've decided, now, that the reason I dislike this triangle is that
 > > fictionality is more or less a binary quality.  A language can be
 > > fictional and also practical or abstract, perhaps, but it can't really
 > > be "somewhat fictional" - you've either defined fictional speakers or
 > > not.
 >
 > What about a conlang which is designed to be used in a fiction as a non-
 > successful IAL that is not even spoken by its author? ;))))
 >
 > Sorry, I agree on the binariness (is that a word? :) ) of fictionality, but I
 > could help saying this :)) .
 >
Heh, I did think of that actually, but decided not to muddy the waters
any more than I had with the previous few paragraphs.  There is, in
this sense, an intermediate position (or a few) but there isn't a
smooth gradation (and such exceptions will be rare, anyway).

I guess binariness is a word.  Certainly sounds better than binarity
:) but I'd probably avoid the issue and say binary nature.