Re: Aesthetics

Hallo!

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:09:38 -0300, Edgard Bikelis wrote:

> Salue! (for variation)
>
> On 10/16/07, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Same to me!  IE-style morphology, but not too irregular.  But I like
> > fluid-S active-stative morphosyntactic alignment.
>
>
> Never heard of it before; neat! Do you use it in Old Albic?
Yes!  See http://wiki.frath.net/Old_Albic for a grammar sketch
including an explanation (hopefully understandable) of how it works.

> [...]
>
> > I have a preference for free word order with an underlying VSO head-first
> > pattern.  Among the IE languages, the Celtic ones have the most
> > interesting
> > syntax, and Old Albic syntax is similar (which also makes sense
> > intrafictionally).
>
>
> That is a bold choice, VSO. For me SOV is better, but that's I'm too
> latinate... curiously you posted about the Old Albic 'infinitive' / action
> noun, I will comment on that soon. I've been struggling with vedic
> infinitives for some time now ; ).
VSO is not very common, but it is not all that rare, and I like it
quite much.  It also fits the conhistorical background very well,
in fact, it is virtually prescribed by it: I fancy Old Albic to be
the enigmatic substratum language responsible for the weirdness of
Insular Celtic.

> [comments on Jesse Bangs's manifesto]
Yes, I see these problems, too.  First of all, *any* conlang ought
to be judged against what it is intended to do by its creator.
If it is meant to represent a fictional natural language, it should
be believable as such - otherwise, this criterion is irrelevant.

What regards "completeness and complexity", Jesse Bangs is victim
of the "quantity is quality" fallacy.  Surely, there are masterful
haiku that move the soul of the reader?  Surely, the huge monumental
buildings and sculptures the Nazis were fond of are poor art?  It is
the same with conlangs.  Bigger is not always better.  What regards
the complexity of Old Albic, I sometimes feel it was too complex,
but on other moments, I feel it was too simple.  This perhaps means
that it is just right :)

And "creativity" - no, it is not necessary to go as far away from
one's native language as possible.  One can be very creative within
one's "home family".  And does it matter whether the creator of a
particular conlang speaks a similar language, or a vastly different
one?  I don't think so.  Some people, after being brushed off for
making a linguistically naive "euroclony" first conlang, tend to
toss every "exotic" feature they can find into their second attempt.
But adding more whistles and bells is not the same as adding more
depth.  A good conlanger knows what to include and what not in order
to reach a good balance between the familiar and the exotic.

... brought to you by the Weeping Elf

Reply