LeGuin (was: a 12th century conlang)
|From:||John Cowan <cowan@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, March 25, 1999, 2:48|
Sally Caves scripsit:
> Neither did she really ever construct a language the way we do. I readin an
> article that she "faked it." In "Walking Away From Omelas," she
> came up with the name of her invented world by spelling "Salem O!"
> backwards. When asked if she did what Tolkien did, she said no.
I think this somewhat misrepresents UKL, who is too modest to
associate her quite legitimate conlanging with JRRT's heroic lifelong
efforts. (I can't give citations for what follows.)
If many of her conlangs are primarily onomastic, what's wrong with
that? We don't talk much here about onomastic conlangs (those whose
vocabulary consists of names) but IMHO they are as legitimate as any
Kesh exists as a phonology, a vocabulary (with some interesting
lexicalizations), and a script: morphosyntax is lacking. Many other
artlangs can say no more.
UKL says somewhere that she was able to write a couple of short poems
in Karhidish, but has forgotten most of the language now. I submit
that a conlang you can use for poetry is a "real" conlang.
And then there's Antish, which exists only in translation (i.e it is
a semantics), and what a semantics it is. "Down with the queen"!
> I already described my encounter with novelist Brenda Clough
> who expressed a similar distaste for this kind of passion.
I don't think there's a shred of evidence that UKL disdains the
conlang passion, and some evidence that she actually possesses it.
John Cowan email@example.com
e'osai ko sarji la lojban.