Re: How do diacronic conlangers work?
|From:||Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, May 9, 2007, 15:42|
On Tue, 8 May 2007 21:38:29 +0200, Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:
> It is good to learn that there are other ways, but this raises
> two questions for me:
> - Is this way of working a result of any conscious decision, or
> is it what comes spontaneously to you?
It is something of both. The first thing I did after deciding that
my "Elvish" languages (the name "Albic" came later) would be independent
from Tolkien's, was to sketch out the protolanguage. Later, I decided that
1) there would be a "classical" language distinct from the protolanguage;
2) some of the features I originally intended to have in the protolanguage
would be innovations of the classical language instead;
3) the classical language, being attested in writing in my conworld, would
be considerably better "known" than the protolanguage, which is not,
but is (within the conworld) a reconstructed language, like PIE.
So I split Proto-Q ("Q" was my provisional designation for the family,
which originally was a shorthand for "Quendian" before I parted from
Tolkien's languages) into Proto-Q and Classical Q, and concentrated on
the latter. (Shortly after this event I came up with the family name
> - Have you ever changed, or been tempted to change, a higher
> language to get or avoid some feature(s) in a lower node
Yes, but not to a large degree. Most things I want, I could so far achieve
without having to make such detours.
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf