Re: LCC2: Meeting our Community
|From:||T. A. McLeay <conlang@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, July 17, 2007, 7:23|
Rick Harrison wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 15:35:17 +1000, T. A. McLeay <conlang@...> wrote:...
> I'm aware of the rule. If my first message was unclear, I was agreeing that the
> 'Balkanaztion' of conlangers into different camps might be questionable, worthy of
> reconsideration. During the language creation process there are more similarities than
> differences, I think. After the design is done, that's when the behaviors and experiences
> really diverge and become very different.
I'm pretty sure there's a few on this list whose main conlangs are
auxlangs. The former Lord John Cowan of the Instrumentality, for
instance, is the author of the book on Lojban, whose design criteria
clearly make it suited for an auxlang (even tho that is not its main
purpose). Dana Nutter is, I belive, another.
I don't really think there is an unnatural balkanisation. I have little
interest in most language types --- I have grown to prefer a posteriori
artlangs and pay little attention to others. Far as I'm aware, that's
all this "balkanisation" is.
Maybe I *still* miss your point...
>>> And another thing... why do we write engelang instead of engilang? If it's a
> contraction of
>>> "engineered" shouldn't it be engi- rather than enge-?
>> AFAIK, it's because it's pronounced /endZl&N/ i.e. as two syllables, and
>> -ge- is one way to spell of soft g (cf. also vegetable /vedZt@b@l/), but
>> -gi- isn't.
> Actually a poll was taken at the end of the recent gathering and quite a few people
> reported using a 3-syllable pronunciation with a schwa in the middle. I don't recall the
> exact results. I've always pronounced it (in my mind) as a 3-syllable word; I've never had
> an opportunity to use it in conversation.
Interesting. I did a quick google because I thought the word was coined
as quite definitely being two-syllables: And I found
I think lablang or engelang will have to be it. Can the latter
However, in a poll to decide whether lablang or engelang should be it:
1. lablang = 17 points, 9 votes
2. englang = 5 points, 3 votes
3. eng(e/i)lang = 4 points, 3 votes
(It's funny that lablang was the clear winner of the poll, but engelang
has been the clear winner of usage. So it seems that polls are
meaningless and I therefore will continue to pronounce it in my mind as