Re: New Survey: Celtic Conlangs (and other lunatic pursuits)

On Sun, 5 Jan 2003 15:10:24 -0500, Sally Caves <scaves@...>
wrote:

(I'm answering this via the listserv archive. Apologies for the length.

>PART I.  FOR CELTIC CONLANGERS:
Not applicable.
I have to add, that despite a PhD in Linguistics, I've barely ever
encountered the Celtic languages.  Our course in IE didn't even cover them
(shame, shame!!).  What little I know of Irish spelling amuses me no end.

>
>PART II:  INSPIRATION BY TOLKIEN
Not applicable.
Let me add here:  I read The Hobbit in the 60s, liked it, but found it just
a bit too whimsical for my taste at the time.  Read the Ring cycle, in one
sitting, in 1976 while "between jobs". Sort of liked it, despite the
frequent longeurs; noted the occasional bits of conlang verse etc. in it
(which I tried to parse), but frankly I was pretty much unaware that JRRT
was a language inventor...!  Now in 2003, I have to confess I haven't seen
the movies, but plan to.

>PART III:  NON-CELTIC CONLANGERS:
>
>What is your name and what do you call your conlang?
Roger Mills.   Kash.
>
>So what is unappealing about the Indo-European model for conlanging?  Or
>Tolkien's Elvish?
Not unappealing; I've just never seen the fun in using IE (or any other
existing lang.) as a starting point-- have tried, and found it too
constraining.  Also, I feel that IE (academically) is pretty well mined out
(I abandoned Romance Linguistics for that reason, in favor of Malayo-Poly.
where I felt it was still possible to do original work).
>
>How did you start conlanging?  What was your initial inspiration?
In 8th or 9th grade (1948/9), after reading tons of articles in my
grandfather's ca.1900 encyclopedia in the attic.  I was probably looking
for articles on sex but got sidetracked to Sanskrit........
>
>Did you know about Tolkien's inventions?  Read the books, the appendices?
>etc.  Or not?
At that time, certainly not.
>
>What language types have you modeled your language(s) after?
Youthful efforts: 1st."Millsaic" < Sanskrit/Latin, pages and pages of
declensions and conjugations. I barely understood what I was doing. 2nd.
"Thenian"-- a priori but with a Latin flavor and a weird syllabic script
inspired by some Thai that I'd seen. I wrote mainly religious texts in it.
Then I went off to boarding school, was mercilessly kidded for inventing
languages, and stopped.  Until 1976, after reading The Left Hand of
Darkness-- Kash was born.  By that time I was quite proficient in
Comparative Malayo-Polynesian stuff, so Kash reflects that.
>
>What features of these languages or language types appeal to you?
The complexity.  Also studying the development through time. Even with
Kash, I couldn't resist sticking in some noun cases and verbal tenses......
>
>Some of you, and I'm thinking in particular of a conversation I had with
And
>Rosta, are not interested in producing a language that is
> "mellifluous"--that "mellifluousness" is a thing to be avoided in your
>conlang and especially as it is associated with Tolkien's Elvish or copiers
>of Elvish.   Is this so?  Why?
I'm not biased one way or t'other, though all my favorites _are_
mellifluous (Romance,Indonesian and its relatives).  I could never produce
a con-Georgian, I guess, but a little complexity doesn't hurt.  OTOH I
wouldn't set out to design a "pretty" language either.
>
>For how many of you, though, is beauty and/or efficiency a factor in your
>language?  Or elegance?  How would you define these terms?
I now aim for a (putative) usability, a naturalistic flavor
>
>For how many of you is the "exotic" a desired feature of your invented
>language?
Not consciously.  For me, any non-W.Eur. language qualifies as "exotic", a
term whihc, like "beauty" and "elegance" depends on the beholder.
>
>How many of you invent a non-human language?  And if so, how alien are its
>sounds and constructions?
Kash is spoken by non-humans, but I've assumed their vocal tract is similar
to ours.  For me, it wouldn't be any fun to create something that noone
including myself could pronounce.
>
>Do you prefer inventing an a posteriori language or an a priori language?
>In other words, how many of you invent a language wherein you base it
>closely on a natural language (Arabic, Tagalog) or a combination of
>languages, and how many others of you invent a language from, well,
scratch?
>(if that can be done.)
Definitely a priori, but probably one's likes and dislikes (if only
subcounsciously) determine the outcome.
>
>How many of you invent a language based on a particular type (Ergative,
>Accusative, Trigger, etc.)?
Ergative would be interesting, now that I've learned (from the List) more
about how it works.  A trigger conlang I suspect would simply be a copy of
Tagalog and its cousins.  What more can be done with that?? Worth a try
maybe..... So I'm stuck with plain vanilla Nom/Acc/Gen/Dat.
>
>To what degree is difficulty and irregularity of language important to you
>in your conlang?  what natural language eccentricities (or efficiencies) do
>you like and try to reproduce?
Since my own experience is with relatively "easy" languages, I tend in that
direction....  Too much difficulty is off-putting.  Total regularity is
BOOOring. So I come down somewhere in the middle.
Eccentricities that I like: morphophonemic changes.  Metathesis. Odd
constraints on relative clauses, like the Indonesian rule that the relative
pronoun MUST be the subject of its clause.
>
>To what degree is accessibility, efficiency, and regularity important to
>your conlang?
Important but not overwhelming.

>What natural language "faults" are you correcting?
None I can think of.  In fact, I created a "fault" in Kash--no passive
voice; makes things quite difficult.
>
>How many of you invent logical languages?
No no, 1000 times no.
>
>How many of you invent IALs?
Emphatic no again.
>
>How many of you have invented non-Tolkienesque or non European concultures
>and what are they like?
The Kash and Gwr live on another planet; the Kash are telepathic, sort of
leonine and rather laid-back; the Gwr are somewhat simian, vigorous and
clever to a fault. Both are furry.
>
>How many of you started out by pulling words out of the air, originally?
>How many of you have chosen a more methodic form of vocabulary building?
>I.e., how have you gone about setting up the framework for your words and
>your grammar?
>(I started out pulling words out of the air.)
So did I; although the one word of Millsaic I recall was the verb "to bear"
which went bharami/bharasi/bharati in the present tense but got a lot more
interesting thereafter....Thenian was a priori, but the words were
constrained by the syllabary, a mix of C, V, CV, CVC, CVCV and maybe CC
characters (I guess the encyclopedia didn't explain syllabaries very
well....). "I am" was bhlithe, "he is" was bhlishu; ikimorithaz meant "that
which...".  Sadly, it's all lost and gone; would be fun to look at now.

Now of course, proper linguist that I am, I start with phonology, a nice
set of MS rule etc. etc. and off we go. Kash phonology was the same in
1999, when I really got going on it, as it was in 1976; the vocabulary and
grammar changed in minor ways, mainly because I misplaced the early notes.
Used LangMaker to generate several thousand forms, but _I_ assign the
meanings, dammit.
>
>
>PART IV:  THE LUNATIC SURVEY REVISITED (because we are all "fous du
>langage," according to Yaguello and other French critics.
>
>Why do you conlang?  Who will speak it?  Read it?  What's the point?
What's
>the beauty?  what's the intellectual draw?
This is difficult; very hard to say. Incidentally, I'm gay-- I guess that
would be relevant to the Yaguellian school of thought.
Why-- perhaps the creative impulse, the desire and challenge to create
something complex yet pleasing ("beautiful") in my own estimation. And one
would hope or imagine that others would find it so (hence my devotion to
this List). The detail (I often accuse myself of having a clerk's
mentality...).
Who-- nobody of course, except the creatures who inhabit my fantasy world.
Read-- ditto.
The point-- frankly, what's the point of anything?  I'm sure I'm still
rebelling against my parents who always said, Oh, be practical.  No.  I
find joy in those things others call useless.
The beauty-- already explained, I think.
Intellectual draw-- of course.  As a fellow on another list put it (in a
dicussion of whether Borges would have appreciated conlanging-- we decided
he would have)-- "The grave and careful elaboration of the unreal, thereby
lending reality to that unreality."
>
>To what would you compare a conlang?  Is it a miniature?  Is it a model?
Is
>it a tapestry?  Is it an act of obsession and madness? <G>  Or is it a
>communicable language?
All of those. But obsession/madness in last place....
>
>If it is a communicable language, to whom do you speak it?
It is communicable.  I speak it inwardly, to myself at times.  I used to
speak Indonesian to the cats I had in grad school, but the current batch
haven't been exposed to Kash.
>
>To what extent is the opacity or "alterity" of your language something that
>pleases you?  In other words, the sounds and the script have, even for you,
>a quality of being foreign, and this delights.
Absolutely.
>Comment?  (I know that when I make maps of cities, and imagine myself in
>them, they delight me because they are both familiar and foreign at the
same
>time.)
I've done maps too, with much the same reaction.  If I knew how to paint,
I'd do vast nightscapes of cities, such as you see when flying-- great
expanses of light marking the patterns of the streets.
>
>This is a difficult question:  how is it that a word sounds "right" to you?
>We recently discussed this.  To what extent are you finding righter, better
>words for the world in your conlang?  (Perhaps unanswerable).
Right, unaswerable.  One know it when one sees/hears it.
>
>How many of you are fictive map-makers, designers of fictive floor plans,
Yes to both-- including some real floor plans (I've done some house-
rehabbing). Come to think of it, it would be fun to build a model of one of
my cities.
>fictive yachts, fictive star-ships, world-builders, calligraphers,
>cartoonists, etc.?
No to all but world-building, though I haven't really worked on that much.
>
>How many of you have a special script in your conlang?
Yes.  It's quite phonemic.
>
>If you use Roman script, how recognizably "phonetic" is your writing
system?
Romanized Kash is also quite phonemic; fortunately the phonology is fairly
simple.

>In other words, do you use unconventional letters to represent sounds?
If I had odd sounds, I would adapt something from the keyboard
>Why?
>
>This is a question Heather asked, but I also asked it four years ago:  how
>many of you write in your language?  What do you write?
A little.  Mostly small poems.  The translation relays.  Several ideas for
things, but oh the inertia......
>
>How many of you sing in your language and have invented songs for that
>purpose?
I do not sing in any language.  Mirrors break.  Children wail.  Cats flee.
>
>How many of you started conlanging when you were a teenager and have stuck
>to the same language over many years?   Why?
My teen-years efforts are long gone.  But I have worked on Kash only, since
1976 (with a 20 year hiatus).  The Real World kept getting in the way; now
that I'm retired and finished with houses, there's more time.
>
>How many of you change conlangs regularly, developing structures for many
>languages but not sticking with any one for very long?  Why?
That's not my style.
>
>For how many of you does your language function as a spiritual instrument?
>This is a deeply personal question--let me give you an example.  When I
>first started inventing "Tayonian" in my early teens, what I wrote were
>spells and prayers.  They had a talismanic quality.  Does that ring a bell
>for anybody?
Not really.  Though if I worked seriously on Kash culture and religion,
much of it would reflect my own non- or ex-Christian system.  When I do go
into prayer mode, I resort to the language of the Book of Common Prayer,
1928 ed., with which I grew up (and at one time thought seriously of
entering the priesthood-- but I realized it was no place for a gay man in
those days).
>
>For how many of you was your language at least at one stage of its making
>meant to fool others, or to write secret diaries? (Me, waving my hand).
No, never.
>
>How many of you can speak your language, at least to yourself and your pet?
>child?  spouse?  <G>  To what extent?
Yes, to self, mainly.  The cats aren't responsive enough.  No child, no
spouse or SO, alas.
>
>How many of you have put up websites where your language can be showcased?
>If so, what is the website address?
http://cinduworld.tripod.com/contents.htm
>
>How many of you have made soundbytes of your language so the rest of us can
>hear it?  If so, give the site.
No but I'd like to, and will eventually.
>
>How many of you are comfortable talking to your boss, your professors, your
>family members about this pursuit?
Not.

>How many of you have received
>condescending or other negative responses to your disclosure?
Yes from my sister, but she thinks I'm really weird anyway.... A couple of
friends are receptive, even interested.  Amusing incident:  at my 50th
school reunion last spring, one classmate (who I'd barely known) asked if I
was still inventing languages.  I said yes, and we had a nice chat.
Apparently my teen efforts had impressed him, at least.

  Or
>even been called "pathological"?
No, just weird, thank you very much.
>
>If this attitude is changing, to what do you attribute the change?
I guess it's changing; probably due to the popularity of Klingon, Tolkien,
other ST stuff.  This List has certainly made a quantum leap in membership
and activity as a result of the LOTR movies-- I think.  Perhaps your survey
will prove or disprove this.

(On New
>Year's Eve, a delightful, elderly gentleman could not understand why I
would
>be interested in this pursuit.  What purpose could it serve?)
My standard response is:  1) intellectual challenge (but so is learning
e.g. Russian) then 2) creative impulse (which learning a natlang is not, or
not very).  If they don't accept that, I excuse myself and go get another
drink.
>
>For how many of you is the damning statement "better to learn real
languages
>than invent private ones" a criticism you have encountered?  What would be
>your response to such a remark?
There isn't a lot one can say, except: Well, why collect stamps? or any
other such activity that gives pleasure only to the doer, and has only
incidental practical value.
>
>
>PART V:  GENERAL DEMOGRAPHICS:
>
>What is your age (optional--and can be general: 30-40, for instance)
Just shy of 70.  Never imagined it.
>
>What is your profession or your station in life (i.e., if you are a
student,
>what is your MAJOR; if a middle or high-school student, what is your
>intended major)?
Well, I'm "retired"-- but from what? I haven't been a member of the
workforce for years.  In an ideal world, I'd now be a professor emeritus,
but that didn't happen.  Many are called, few are chosen.
>
>What is your gender?
Male, gay.
>
>What is your nationality and your native language?
US.  English
>
>What natural languages do you speak or have studied?
Speak: Spanish and Indonesian, with ever decreasing ability.  Studied in
one way or another-- too many to list.  I did linguistics in grad school
after all.
>
>How many of you have chosen a profession in linguistics because of your
>interest in inventing languages?  Or plan a profession in linguistics?
I did, but didn't get my PhD until 1975, age 41; it was a bit late to get
into the game.  Had my parents not been so disapproving of the academic
world (that's a long story), I might have done things the normal way and
gotten underway a lot earlier.
>
>What have you learned from conlanging?
That creating a language is every bit as fun as learning a natlang.
>
>What texts on language and linguistics have you consulted to help invent
>your language?
Goodness-- everything I read in grad school, and a lot before that, mostly
on the Romance languages.
>
>Do you know of anyone who has not connected with the Internet or the List
>who has invented a language? (I'm firmly convinced that "conlanging" has
>been a private pursuit for many people long before the list started, but
>that the list has increased its visibility as an art).
Don't know anyone else.  But I'm sure they're out there.
>
>Can you give me a short sample of your language with interlinear
description
>and translation--
(first two lines of a poem)
aposimim tolisa ri tambranipan
añ-fosi-mim toli-sa ri tambranipa-n
noml.-sail-our call/visit-past LOC NAME-acc.
ship-our    called      at  Tambranipa [a mythical island]
"Our ship called at Tambranipa"

vara handa-makandapo, sawu kitra...
vara handa-mañ-handa-po, sawu kitra
in.order load-recip-load-just, water take.on
"just to load and unload cargo, take on water"

An ordinary sentence:
kaçut marok re ne manunji ri ñakrece, me yakotasa anjura ehas
kaçut marok re ne ma-nunji ri ñakrece, me ya-kota-sa añ-cura ehas
man old  REL 3/dat 1s-meet LOC  train, 1/dat 3s-say-past noml-tell strange
"An old man I met on the train told me a strange story."
(The clause "kaçut...ñakrece," is a topic, the rest is comment.  Without
the lengthy rel.clause and comma, it would be an ordinary SVO sentence.

>
>Would you object to my mentioning your conlang/and or your name in my talk?
>I will be discreet about some of the more personal questions you answered.
Feel free.

Reply