Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Joseph Smith the Conlanger?

From:Muke Tever <hotblack@...>
Date:Wednesday, March 16, 2005, 0:37
Chris Bates <chris.maths_student@...> wrote:
>> or 2) an unofficial script invented for a natlang that already has a >> script. > > How do you define official? No one own's a language except possiblythe sum of > all its speakers, so I can't see how any script can beofficial or unofficial > since there isn't an organization with the right > to bless it. Even the various language academies set up by governmentsdon't own > the language, all they do is attempt and fail to imposecentral control.
The scope of "official" is not "all speakers of a language", but under the scope of the instituting _office_, e.g., country, corporation, church, language academy, educational institution, whatever. People not recognizing such authorities may do what they like--perhaps not without consequences--but what they then do on their own is the essence of unofficiality. [I should probably make explicit that I mean nothing derogatory by "unofficial" here.] Cf.
> I would define a conscript as any script invented by one or a small > number of people rather than a script which evolved through the use of a > large number of people, whether that script is intended for a natlang or > not, and whether that natlang already has a script or not. So basically > I agree with the previously suggested definition.
Though by such a definition Hangul is a conscript, and I'm not sure I'd agree with that. I think there has to be some point at which a conscript can become a natscript, similar to how a [re-]constructed language becomes a natlang by acquiring native speakers. *Muke! -- website: LiveJournal: deviantArt: FrathWiki, a conlang and conculture wiki: