Re: creating words (was Re: "Language Creation" in your conlang)

Jörg Rhiemeier sikyal:

> Hallo!
>
> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:43:22 +0100,
> Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> wrote:
>
> > None of my other conlangs appear to be up to the task ATM. I've never been
> > good at creating vocabulary.
>
> I know very well what you are talking about.  I am also pathetic
> at creating words; my strengths in the field of conlanging lie in
> coming up with (hopefully) interesting phonologies and morphologies.
> Lack of vocabulary is what weighs down my "Elvish" languages most:
> while I have clear ideas about their phonology and a host of good ideas
> for their grammar, the languages need words, words and more words.
This is also my problem. Yivrian has been around for nearly a decade now,
and is yet to breach 1000 vocabulary items. The Weekly Vocabulary lists
have been a great help in this respect, but my vocab still grows slower
than I'd like. However, I'm reaching the point where my vocabulary is
starting to accrete on itself and grow more quickly--I have enough roots
that I can make new etymologically plausible words quite quickly, and
compounds and expansions of existing words can cover a lot of the
subtleties.

> Hence, I find it easier to come up with a posteriori languages
> such as Germanech; but on the other hand, I have numerous ideas
> I want to use in my languages that don't fit into an a posteriori
> scheme based on something I know (essentially Germanic and Romance).
Since historical development is a big part of my conlanging, my future
language projects look more and more like a posteriori projects based on
my current langs.


--
Jesse S. Bangs jaspax@u.washington.edu
http://blog.glossopoesis.org

"We're counting on our virtues,
Cause it's too hard to count the dead."
 - Jason Webley