Con to Aux to Natlang. Influences on Natlangs
|From:||Michael Adams <abrigon@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, November 15, 1998, 13:52|
I think basically a Conlang is a lingo that has normally one or a small group of
speakers, limited vocabulary, and is constructed. Something like how Klingon,
Esperanto, Lojlan/Loglab(sp) were at one time.
As someone stated, Esperanto and Lojlan have gotten to the point that they have a
large enough vocabulary, more than one/smaller group speaks it, and in a way
that they are used for more than fun, but for some "official" purpose, they
have become Auxlangs. Esperanto has gotten to the point that though it is
constructed, it has approched Natlang status, namely a large enough native
speakers of it to keep it going.
Klingon for now is sort of a Auxlang, but still has to find some "official" usage
other than for fun/fan and all. For once the Fans die off, then what?
The lingo follows next.
This leads to my second question/idea. What effects so far has the con/aux lingos
had on the truely natlangs as well as the constructed natlangs (Esperanto and
I know for some the usage of "Kupla" (sp) for success from Klingon is a small
example of what I mean.
I speak English, and a smattering of words in German, Inupiat Eskimo and other
Alaskan lingos, nothing fancy, the basic toilet and like words..
-----== Sent via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Easy access to 50,000+ discussion forums