introduction Middelsprake : artlangs & conlangs vs. auxlangs
|Date:||Tuesday, June 28, 2005, 22:37|
Hello, everyone, thanks for writing.
To me, an ArtLang is an ARTificial LANGuage constructed for ARTistic
All FictLangs are ArtLangs, by that definition. But note, not all
ArtLangs need be FictLangs.
Ingmar's Middelsprake, as well as some others of his ConLangs, are
also ArtLangs, in spite of not all being FictLangs; and in spite of
the fact that MiddelSprake was constructed by a technique similar to
one by which some InterLinguas are constructed. The differences are
(1) Ingmar's purpose, (2) what he has done with the language, and (3)
what he asks us to do with the language.
Ingmar does seem to be involved with an AuxLang project; but
MiddelSprake is not it.
I think that those things about MiddelSprake that Ingmar has chosen
to post here, I would welcome here.
Is that about what most others think? Or does it need modification?
Tom H.C. in MI
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Henrik Theiling <theiling@A...> wrote:
> Carsten Becker <naranoieati@B...> writes:
> > From: "Ingmar Roerdinkholder"
> > <ingmar.roerdinkholder@W...>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 11:36 AM
> > > Wat ig wilde wete gerne, is:
> > >
> > > *kan du lese dis?
> > Ja, ig kan.
> Ig okso. :-)
> > As ik komma fran Düitschlant, ig skon spreke en Germanisch sprakeun
> > hev kaan problem met forstan din sprake.
> > OK, that was a faint attempt to imitate your language -- butindeed,
> > it looks very much like a crossing between Dutch and German, with
> > some Swedish thrown in.
> Yes, that's how it felt for me, too. I could recognise most words,
> but often it took a while to recognise that it's Scandinavian.
> I'd not try to blend unrelated stems from several langs, though, but
> that's merely my personal taste, of course. :-)
> BTW, what's the word for 'forest'?
> > Oh, yeah, and welcome to the list -- but actually, if you
> > intend to make an Interlingua, this is not quite the right
> > place since we're dealing rather with constructed languages
> > for artful purposes (conlangs) here. There's a seperate list
> > dedicated to auxiliary languages (auxlangs).
> I really don't think that was Ingmar's intention. I did not knowhow
> to read his first posting, but now it's clear that the idea is to
> simply discuss it.
> That's what this list is for. And probably it's even the best place
> to discuss it. :-)