Re: This is not a conlang.

>I once knew a man (he was actually a minister) who said that although
>he *did* speak in tongues, the idea of it didn't appeal to him,
>because he was a logical sort of person to whom speaking in tongues
>didn't make much sense as a concept. For this reason, he had actually
>prayed more than once that God would *take away* the gift that he
>didn't want, and every time he prayed this, he found that instead of
>being removed altogether, the "language" of his tongues would be
>replaced by a different "language" with a completely different
>phonology!
>
I guess I can relate to that :S

I worship at the sort of church that does the whole "speaking in tongues"
thing.  There's a whole bunch of things that bother *me* about it, and I do
it myself!

One of the things that bothers me on the way some people "speak in tongues"
is the way it seems to be just a jumble of the same 3-5 syllables over and
over again.  "Glossolalia baby talk" is how I sometimes think of it :)!

Usage-wise in my church, there are two different "kinds" of speaking in
tongues.  There's the general stuff where a variety of people spontaneously
erupt in a tongue, as an expression of deep worship to God.  This sort of
matches your "nonsense syllables dedicated to God as a kind of art form", I
guess.
Then there's the form of speaking where one speaker brings a message in a
tongue, and someone else translates.

It bothers my logical mind, but I can put up with it.  Lots of things don't
make a whole lot of sense to me sometimes.

Subjectively speaking, as one who speaks in tongues *and* is able to
generate random gibberish, I find that the "feel" of it is quite
different.  I can almost always tell when I'm speaking a tongue and when
I'm just making it up.  The phonology is not always all that different
(though it sometimes is), but the feel most definitely is.

On a lighter note, one of the other things that bothers me about the
whole "tongues" thing is how you never hear anyone make an error and
correct themself ;)!!

G