Re: OT: Artlanging is now mainstream

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Wesley Parish
<wes.parish@...> wrote:
> If he'd show instead of tell, I could take him seriously.  He said he's made
> the beginnings of a conlang, but I don't see any evidence of it on the blog.
FWIW, that post has some hint at it at the end - eg the part that ends with:

"opaque{internal | affected} gruesome{classifier | affected}
{perspective} black{affected} rubbish{proximal | affecting } {topic}
absurd{affecting} {towards} {affected copula} disgusting{internal |
affected}"

(Anyone else reminded of <http://www.tokipona.org/angst.html> and
<http://www.nkuitse.com/conlang/glosses/>?)

I don't see any indication a full write-up existing though, or that
the language is completed enough to have one... so this does feel a
bit like saying that others suck 'cause they don't live up to his
expectations that they'll be as sufficiently radical as his vaguely
held desires.

In some sense, I'd like him to be right - I also am interested in
seeing the "what could be" of language. So if he writes up his idea
I'd read it.

But the idea that people *not* interested in that can be evaluated by
that standard is ludicrous, let alone attacking them personally over
it.

*shrug* Eventually he'll get over it, maybe join the community and be
a contributing member. Or not.

- Sai