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

John Cowan:
> Shreyas Sampat scripsit:
>
> > What's the etymology of 'engelang'?  It's a bit more obscure than the other
> > terms.
>
> "Engineered language".  In an engelang, the criteria for suitability
> are, or are supposed to be, public, objective, and verifiable, as opposed
> to artlangs where the criteria are private and interior.  In the long
> run, this is a distinction without a difference -- there is no such thing
> as private art -- but to the creator it makes substantial difference.
To me, it makes a much more substantial difference to the conlang's
'audience' than to its creator. Artlangs can be enjoyed as other artforms
can, but are as hard to criticize meaningfully as other artforms are.
But engelangs can be both enjoyed as other products of engineering can
be, and criticized meaningfully, in that one can assess how well the
engelang achieves its declared goals. This is fully apparent in the
case of the most thoroughly described engelangs, Loglan and Lojban:
I reckon that the design of no other conlang has received such intensive
critical analysis.

--And.