Re: Has anyone made a real conlang?

 --- Iain Davis skrzypszy:

> > Personally I have the lexicons for my languages in MS Access
>
> Interesting.  I decided Access was over-kill for my needs.
Oh, that's quite possible. Many people can survive without it. It's just that I
like Access, and I really can't work with Excel.

> Do you have an actual relational structure, or just a set of un-related
> tables?
At this moment I work with unrelated tables. To be honest, I think a relational
database is overkill for a simple vocabulary file. Besides, until a year ago I
did everything in dBase III+, and most of the tables I work with come from
there.

> Well...you don't _have_ to translate it.  You _could_ tell us non-dutch
> speaking types "tough! Learn Dutch!". :).  I regard you translating your
> work into english for us an act of kindness on your part, rather than a
> "must be done" thing.  Just like putting it on the web at all. :)
Thank you, I'm glad you appreciate it :) . Well, it is also an act of kindness
towards myself. After all, the conlang community is already small enough as it
is, and a website in Dutch would dangerously limit my potential audience.

> Oh definitely.  There are many tools to make various parts of the process
> easier, but in the end, it all takes time.  And doubt any of us have quit
> our day jobs. :)
Indeed.

> > No, when I think of it, I think the actual number of word
> > in a language could actually be a lot HIGHER than langmaker.com
> > says.
>
> I totally agree.  I'm packing up my study at home (move preparation) and
> discovering all sorts of scribbles and notes that I had forgotten about...
Yes. Plus the fact that since the moment somebody submitted his entry to
Langmaker.com his actual number of words is likely to have increased.

> For the record, I'm satisified with the broad division of terms (natlang,
> conlang, auxlang, artlang) that exist.  I see no need to classify by size,
> especially since 'size' may not be meaningful anyway.  To many different
> ways to measure the 'size' of a language.  We could end up classify a
> natlang as being "not a real language"...
LOL, indeed.

Jan

=====
"Originality is the art of concealing your source." - Franklin P. Jones

__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer

Replies