Re: Ba'l-a-i-bal-an
| From: | Jim Henry <jimhenry1973@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Sunday, May 21, 2006, 0:12 |
|---|
On 5/20/06, R A Brown <ray@...> wrote:
> Great - interesting stuff. I have been thinking recently that our
> tripartite division of conlangs into artlangs, auxlangs & engelangs does
> not really cater for things like Bala-i-balan or Hildegard's 'Lingua
> Ignota' - languages of cult or worship. Probably the ceremonial language
> Damin should be considered in the same category.
>
> I would guess that cultic and/or ceremonial conlangs were the most
> common type before westerners began constructing 'philosophical'
> languages as auxlangs in the 17th century. What would one call such
> conlangs? 'esolangs' <-- eso(teric) lang(uage)s???
Hm... "hagioglossa" might work. Various possibilities with
truncated English morphemes on the model of "conlang" & "engelang"...
* praylang [or "prayerlang"?]
* cultlang [eh, probably not]
* ritelang [maybe confusable with "writelang" or "rightlang"...]
* worlang /w@`leIN/ [ < "wor(ship) lang(uage)"]
None of them seems any better than "hagioglossa" (assuming
I've got it right).
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry
Replies