Re: What to Call Non-Conlangers

Ivan Baines wrote:
>>>Ha!  I think this one's the best.  First, it rhymes.  Second, even
>>>though it would seem to technically imply that these are people
>>>without language, the only people who use "prefix-lang" are
>>>conlangers, so it seems like the "-lang" suffix implies conlanging,
>>>even in a word like "natlang".  Yeah, my vote is for nonlanger
>>>(not that we're voting).
>>
>>I'd second it. Actually, I thought of it as soon as Dan asked for
>>suggestions, but didn't get around to saying it :). It seems a little
>>bit mean, but since it's clearly nonsensical as well, it's IMHO much
>>preferable to "avlangers", "civvies", "[mun]danes", etc etc...
>
>
> Definitely gets my vote.  But it doesn't necessarily imply people
> without language.  I see it this way: there are a number of words
> ending in -langer, right, which describe people who engage in
> various related activities - e.g. conlanger, romlanger, loglanger,
> etc.  These people could be collectively called "langers".  Thus
> those who don't engage in such activities would quite clearly be
> "non-langers"!
Your email address suggests you're in the UK (and I think tiscali
isn't in NI, so I can probably conclude you're outside of Ireland);
But I wonder does "langer" have the same meaning over there as it
does for us (in Ireland)? Not that I can adequately describe what
it means, apart from saying that it doesn't have anything to do
with languages. Damn, now I've started to see "langer" in words like
"conlanger" and "nonlanger", which previously appeared innocent.

s.
--
Stephen Mulraney                            ataltane@ataltane.net
The best way to remove a virus is with vi and a steady hand -- me

Reply