Re: Has anyone made a real conlang?

Jan van Steenbergen wrote:

JvS> Now be serious, Andrew. Are you saying that a language
JvS exists only as soon as it has made its entrance on the
JvS web? Not everybody has a computer, and even those who
JvS have one are not automatically able to create websites.

Those who do not have a computer cannot use this mailing list.
Making a web file and sending it to a website is a trivial task.
You can make a text file if you cannot make an HTML file.

Andrew Nowicki wrote:
AN> By the way, most vocabulary sizes listed in LangMaker.com
AN> are exaggerated, sometimes by several orders of magnitude!

JvS> ???
JvS> That is quite a painful and pointless accusation.
JvS> In order words, you call us liars! I am curious what
JvS> kind of proof your idea is based on...

I spent a few hours comparing the stated vocabulary
size with the one posted on the web. I did not count
every word, just made a rough estimate.

AN> Perhaps there is a need for a new name for something that
AN> is bigger than an alphabet, smaller than a language, and
AN> made purely for fun... What about "funlang". Now, how would
AN> we define a complete funlang? Maybe alphabet + complete
AN> grammar + vocabulary of 100 to 999 words?

JvS> Personally, I don't see the point of making this
JvS distinction. The term "conlang" means "constructed
JvS language", no matter its purpose or the size of
JvS> its vocabulary. The term "artlang" suggests that
JvS the language has been created to meet certain artistic
JvS criteria, established solely by the creator.

Computer programs are called may names, depending on
their size and purpose. An operating system is bigger than
most application programs, which are still bigger than
functions (subroutines). There are games, spreadsheets,
and many other programs. These names are used because they
are useful. I do believe there is need to describe conlangs
more precisely than just artlangs and IALs.

By the way, I have not accused anyone of anything.

AN> The problem is that most people are arrogant and
AN> have short attention span.

JvS> Do you mean that any artist who prefers to create
JvS> his own works instead of participating in group
JvS> projects is arrogant?

Of course, not, but I dear to say (no matter how unpopular
it is) that most people I know are either arrogant and have
short attention span. People in general cannot work as
team members. You can either have them on your throat
or under your heel. Internet could be used for many exciting
projects if people were more cooperative.

Replies