Re: Lin: Phonology & Orthography

At 12:10 pm +0000 27/3/02, And Rosta wrote:
>Ray:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I know these probably are not the features of Srikanth's compact conlang
>> called Lin that those who asked about it are most interested in.  But I'm
>> still trying to understand the enneasemy & 'cement' bits myself!
>[...8<...]
>
>Thanks for posting this, Ray. It's a rare treat to see a conlang
>exhibit such cerebrally baroque panache, and even the few others
>of its ilk, such as Guaspi and Plan B, are less original, being
>Loglan-derivatives. I think my conlang tastes have changed Linwards
>since Skrintha left, because regrettably I did not adequately appreciate
>Lin at the time when he was actually around;
Herein we are in violent agreement  :)

I didn't appreciate Lin adequately either; my own interests were in its
compactness, since that is one of the aims of BrSc.  But I confess I looked
at Lin and thought: "Help! Compactness is one thing, but this is
ridiculous!"

Now, in response to the two three requests, I'm looking at the stuff again
and thinking "Wow, what originality!" and am leaning more Linwards also.

>................it's fortunate for us
>that your good judgement was there to preserve some Lin information
>for us.
Basically, it was to see how someone else was dealing with compactness or
brevity.  I only wish I kept Srikanth's stuff in electronic form  :)

But then, I'd probably just forward it without reading it and trying, this
time, to understand it all.

My regret that I didn't do this when Srikanth was around so I could ask him
a few questions to clear up odd points.  Hopefully, he'll return one day.

Ray.



=========================================
A mind which thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language.
                     [J.G. Hamann 1760]
=========================================