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

On Jan/05/2003, Sally Caves wrote:

> PART I.  FOR CELTIC CONLANGERS:
        (not me)

> PART II:  INSPIRATION BY TOLKIEN (tangential to the questions on inspiration
> by Celtic languages):
> How many of you were inspired to invent a language because of your exposure
> to Tolkien?
        I always loved Tolkien, and the sound and "look" of the names in
his literature always amazed me. But conlanging started only a few
months ago O:-)

> How many of you based your conlang on one of Tolkien's languages, or your
> conculture in Middle Earth?
        Not me.

> How many of you have a constructed world, and, if so, does it include some
> of the races we associate with Celtic or Scandinavian mythology? (Elves,
> Dwarves, medieval societies of humans, Faeries or Fays?  Selkies?  Wizards?)
        Yep. There's a conworld "on hold" which used the only conlang
that I really did (only a few bits, anyway). I started with another
world with the idea of making it very light and standard, ie., with
elves, dwarves, orcs, and all the stuff. But the &!"·$!"$ now is
starting to grow. I think it's some kind of compulsive behaviour :-)

> How many of you were inspired to examine Welsh, Hebrew, or Finnish because
> of your examination of Tolkien?
        Not me.

> How many of you were inspired to invent a conlang or a conculture because of
> some influence OTHER than Tolkien?
        Nope.

> How many of you were inspired to invent a language because you engage in
> Roll-Playing Games?
        That was part of the aim :-) The worlds I build are, at first,
thought for RPGing. Though I'd like to think that maybe in a future I'll
try to write something about them out of the RPG sphere :-)

> How many of you were inspired to invent a language because you heard of this
> listserv?
        Me O:-) My first contact with conlanging was Mark Rosenfelder's
"How to create a language", while searching for world-building links.
Then I found this list, and then ... :-)

> How many of you are members of the Mythopoeic Society, or the Society for
> Creative Anachronism, or other High Fantasy Groups?
        I don't even know what those societies are :-)

> PART III:  NON-CELTIC CONLANGERS:
> In the discussions I've witnessed on Conlang in almost five years, I've
> observed that many conlangers have deliberately avoided "Tolkienesque"
> languages, and even Indo-European languages as models for conlangs, and
> especially the "Celtic."  Why?  Boring?  Overdone?  Trite?  Too pretty?
        I myself would think overdone. When I do something (be it in
conlanging, music, RPGing, etc.), I try to be at least a bit original.
But on the other hand, if there's something that I like, I use it. Well,
it's easier said than done, but I try :-)

> What is your name and what do you call your conlang?
        Roberto Suarez, and my (now on hold as the world it belongs to,
pending revision) conlang is Unahoban.

> So what is unappealing about the Indo-European model for conlanging?  Or
> Tolkien's Elvish?
        I think that it's only that everyone starts with something alike
to Tolkien's work, and so it has become a bit boring, or at least
unoriginal :-)

> How did you start conlanging?  What was your initial inspiration?
        I wanted to try. I've always liked languages, though I'm quite a
procrastinator and I rarely have self-discipline enough to learn any
O:-) But I've always liked to know the rules, the inner workings of
things. As Physics or Maths are too boring to study (which is, itself,
something very boring O:-)), my interests are simple and quick to
understand things as languages and RPG games, which are full of rules to
explain everything :-)

> Did you know about Tolkien's inventions?  Read the books, the appendices?
> etc.  Or not?
        The "official" books, yes: LotR, Silmarillion, The Hobbit.

> What language types have you modeled your language(s) after?
        I try to be original, but ... :-) Unahoban has grown similar to
Spanish in grammar, with tolkienesque/japanese (subjective influences,
of course) sound and look, and a few things that I saw in other conlangs
and that I thought were cool (as gender in verbs and external particles
to reflect ... moods? of verbs).

> What features of these languages or language types appeal to you?
        I try not to use it, but I'm very fond of english-like and
generally isolating composites, like "thunderstorm", and names alike to
that (ie., two nouns meaning something more or less related).

>  "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?
        Not me.

> 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 would define beauty in a conlang as the beauty it has for me
:-)

> For how many of you is the "exotic" a desired feature of your invented
> language?
        Of course :-) That's a very big part of the fun, creating
something that is new and not usually seen.

> Do you prefer inventing an a posteriori language or an a priori language?
        A priori. So I can generate the roots with a computer program or
just invent them as I like :-) But I usually get some inspiration for
some words in other languages, kind of mixing and twisting them so
they're not obvious.

> 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?
        Hmm. I like it to be different, but don't look for difficulty
itself.

> How many of you have invented non-Tolkienesque or non European concultures
> and what are they like?
        Define non-Tolkienesque :-) The few concultures I invented for
my previous world were some european/tolkienesque, and some of them
different. There were a mannish race with elements from Classical Roman
culture, for example. And anyway, I think that it would be very
difficult for me to create something without having the subtle influence
of The Professor :-)

> How many of you started out by pulling words out of the air, originally?
        Unahoban started strictly as a computer generated language (the
words and roots, I mean). In the days that I was making it, I was also
making a word-generator. So, Unahoban was the "testbed" for it. Now I've
started to create a new conlang, without name yet, and I'm doing it in a
different way: first I try to think about words which sound I like, and
then justify them. It's slower, but much more rewarding and relaxing :-)
Unahoban was made almost in a hurry O:-)

> 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?
        In this no-named tongue, I try to have consonantic roots that
mean something, and then play with them to create new things. For
example: "ard" is "man", and "krûd" is "spectre" (as "spirit of a dead
man"). They both have "-rd-", which is also present in "thard"
("father") and "ordis" ("whole"). Of course, as this is in a very early
stage, it may change heavily :-)

> 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?
        Hmmm. I know exactly why I do it, but I don't know how to
explain it :-) I'd say that it's for the creative thing of it. I like to
create things. There are things that appear in my mind, and if I don't
put them out of it they keep bouncing inside my head %-) It's the same
thing that has put me into music, RPGing, programming and my very
frustrated attempts at drawing :-)

> 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?
        For me it's only a toy :-) Something to spend my time with. The
"obsession and madness" bit, I suppose :-D

> 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.
        Not much. I like it to be different, but don't rejoyce in it :-)
Of course, that means that they shouldn't be like anything that exists;
but "opacity" isn't a word I'd use for that.

> This is a difficult question:  how is it that a word sounds "right" to you?
        Uh ... it just sounds right :-) If the sound or the looks are
appealing to me, I use it. Just that.

> We recently discussed this.  To what extent are you finding righter, better
> words for the world in your conlang?  (Perhaps unanswerable).
        I think that the more words you get for it, the more you're
narrowing the threshold of variation of words. So, while at first it's
almost a "anything goes", after a while I start to be more picky and
suited words. It's all about knowing exactly what you want (which is the
hard part, of course :-))

> How many of you are fictive map-makers, designers of fictive floor plans,
> fictive yachts, fictive star-ships, world-builders, calligraphers,
> cartoonists, etc.?  (These pursuits have been associated with conlanging.  I
> 've done most of them.)
        I like world-building, and don't do any of the other things
because I can't; but I sure as hell would like to do them :-) So, count
me in :-)

> If you use Roman script, how recognizably "phonetic" is your writing system?
        Pretty much standard. I use the obligatory random accent marks
and symbols that make for a exotic conlang and that I guess everyone
uses, but not much ;-)

> How many of you change conlangs regularly, developing structures for many
> languages but not sticking with any one for very long?  Why?
        I do. I don't know why, but I suppose that it's the same that
when you program something: when you've finished the program, you don't
use it. The fun is in the creative part. So, in a language, for me the
"creative part" ends when you have done the grammar. It's like if,
knowing just a few rules, you could reconstruct all the language: the
"formula" of the language. Hmmm. Definitely, maybe I would have liked
Physics :-m :-)

> How many of you have put up websites where your language can be showcased?
> If so, what is the website address?
        Hmmm. Let's see, I have it somewhere ...

        http://ceu.fi.udc.es/~robe/conlangs/unahoban.html

        Look the optimistic that I was: I used "conlangs" as the
directory name. Funny :-)

> How many of you are comfortable talking to your boss, your professors, your
> family members about this pursuit?   How many of you have received
> condescending or other negative responses to your disclosure?  (I have.)  Or
> even been called "pathological"?
        Well, I didn't talk a lot about it. Only a few friends,
basically the RPGing group :-) They don't see it (at least in front of
me) as something bad, but don't show any special interest either. We're
all pretty weird to care for these things, I suppose ;-)

        Anyway, I would hesitate *a lot* in telling it to someone I
didn't know very well, or someone that wasn't close to me. I know they
would look at me with a funny face and talk about "mental masturbation",
as other poster said :-)

> 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?
        I'd say that the aim of learning a real language and conlanging
is absolutely different. You do conlanging because you want to create
something; but you learn a new language because you want to know a new
thing, or communicate with more people.

> PART V:  GENERAL DEMOGRAPHICS:
> What is your age (optional--and can be general: 30-40, for instance).
        26.

> 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)?
        Oficially, I work and I study. But I work more than I study, I
must confess O:-) I was a bright student in high school, but it changed
drastically in the University. So now I enjoy much more working (at
least some days) than studying.

> What is your gender?
        I don't have gender, but my sex is masculine ;-)

> What is your nationality and your native language?
        Spain, spanish and galician: my fathers taught me spanish, but
they and all my family speak galician :-)

> What natural languages do you speak or have studied?
        Spanish, galician, english. Well, latin too, in high-school, but
I completely forgot it O:-) I looked a bit of danish, and had a
extremely slight (ie., read a tutorial in a web page once) on a few more
languages.

> What have you learned from conlanging?
        A important bit about linguistics :-)

> What texts on language and linguistics have you consulted to help invent
> your language?
        Mainly online documents. The forementioned Mark Rosenfelder's
doc, and Pablo Flores "Como crear un lenguaje", in particular.

> Can you give me a short sample of your language with interlinear description
> and translation?
        Hmmm. I'll take one of the samples, as it's been a long time
since I did anything with it:

        Ana   tataima           sun a'Etaniera          Elfishti avan
        Three rings(neuter, pl) for the Kings (male,pl) Elven    under

        adimir.
        the sky.

        Hey, it looked good. I'll have to revisit Unahoban one of these
days :-)

> Would you object to my mentioning your conlang/and or your name in my talk?
        Of course not. Remember to tell any single girl between 18 and
35 in your talk that I am single, good person, working and very
handsome. Just in case.

> I will be discreet about some of the more personal questions you answered.
        Oh please, don't tell them that I ate the cookies! :-D

--
        Roberto Suarez Soto