Re: LCC2: Meeting our Community

From: R A Brown <ray@...>

> Rick Harrison wrote:
> > T. A. McLeay <conlang@...> wrote:
> >>>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-?
> Nope - That would surely imply *artilang, and *auxilang? The idea of
> 'engelang' was surely to keep it in line with monosyllabic prefix plus
> -lang.
Look, up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane! It's CONSTRALANG!

> Maybe to avoid confusion we could use g-caron: enǧlang    :)
Similar problem with the colloquial /vEdZ/ (presumably from "vegetate"), meaning "to
think in a clouded way, staring into space, mouth agape (and we're not talking
benevolent love here) (cf. Japanese: "boo to siteru" and Chinese: "fa1dai1")
(eg: Kou standing vacuously in the middle of the kitchen wondering why he
walked in there in the first place says to self: "Douglas, stop vedging!") (and
don't Britons occasionally use /vEdZ/ for "vegetables?"). After dabbling with

veg (which usually elicits "/vEg/")
vege (which usually elicits head-scratching ?'s)  and
vegge (too much like "ye olde shoppe" for my taste, and it still doesn't get you any closer)

high school friends and I decided on "vedge," which still sucks and loses its
original morphophenemic value but at least elicits the correct pronunciation.

But now we can have veǧ! Hurrrah veǧ!... veǧ, veǧ, veǧ.

O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!

Kou (standing in uffish thought)

Replies