Re: CHAT: The profile of a conlanger

Irina Rempt-Drijfhout wrote:
>
> > T or F -- Another close call.  T-type conlangers will be into it
> > because they like building elegant abstract language structures;
> > F-type conlangers will be into it to write poetry.
>
> Both, for me. I think I ought to be T, but every time I take the test
> I come out F... I like building elegant *concrete* language
> structures. Grammar can also be poetry for me.
>
        Thank you very much, Irina. At least I'm not alone to think that
grammar can also be poetry.

> > The J's that are there will be the ones that
> > actually finish conlangs. :)
>
> I *know* that Valdyan will never be finished :-)
>
        I know that this has already been debated among us, but I am always
uncomfortable when someone speaks of "finishing" a conlang. Natlangs are
never finished (except if they are dead), why could conlangs be
finished? Of course, if by "finished" you mean: "put in a state where
one can write in it about anything or nearly anything", or "put in a
state where it is actually usable like any other language", then
everything's good. But can we give this meaning to the verb "finish", or
should we coin a new word for that? :)

>    Irina
>
>             Varsinen an laynynay, saraz no arlet rastynay.
>                      irina@rempt.xs4all.nl (myself)
>        http://www.xs4all.nl/~bsarempt/irina/index.html (English)
>     http://www.xs4all.nl/~bsarempt/irina/backpage.html (Nederlands)
--
        Christophe Grandsire

        Philips Research Laboratories --  Building WB 145
        Prof. Holstlaan 4
        5656 AA Eindhoven
        The Netherlands

        Phone:  +31-40-27-45006
        E-mail: grandsir@natlab.research.philips.com