Re: Language-generating software (was Re: Replies to my Introduction)
| From: | Luís Henrique <luisb@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Wednesday, January 15, 2003, 21:15 |
|---|
On Sat, 11 Jan 2003 00:00:19 -0500, Jeffrey Henning <Jeffrey@...>
wrote:
>A survey of my own--
>
>1. Do you regularly use language-gen software?
>[ ] Yes [ ] No {place an X in the appropriate box}
Hm, no, since I haven't been colanging regularly... But whenever I do it, I
use Langmaker.
>2. If yes, which one?
Langmaker.
>3. What do you like about the language-gen software you've looked at?
>4. What do you dislike?
>5. What would you all like to see in such software?
Well, I like Langmaker. Perhaps I have the same antiuserfriendly bias as
Sarah Marie. But when it tells me that I am loosing all my work, I get
somewhat enraged. Even if I know it is lying!
Tools for derivation would be interesting, but the thing I most miss in
Langmaker is the possibility to make phonotactical restraints at a level
above than that of syllables.
For instance: Banin may have syllables as complex as CCVVCC ("treins" would
be a valid syllable); but it cannot have two of such syllables in just one
word ("fluirstreins" is not a possible Banin word). Langamker doesn't kill
such non-words, and I have to it with a fawcett, which is tiresome...
Luís Henrique