Re: My Conlang Museum in Netscape too

dbell@graywizard.net writes:
>Language by definition is complex.  If you have created a language then
>you have created a complex thing.  If your language doesn't have 20 cases
>then it has a complex prepositional system and/or complex word order
>paradigms that serve the function.  If your language is not
>morphologically complex then there must be complexity in your syntax or
>some other set of complex structures.  If your verb system is simple,
>then you've discovered an elegant way of expressing tense and aspect and
>mood and argument structure etc. that conceals its complexity. I think it
>is this complexity that draws us to conlanging.  I was trying to explain
>our unusual hobby to some family members once and not doing a very good
>job of explaining what motivates us when my daughter piped in with "Its
>like a puzzle!  Daddy always loved
>puzzles"
Well, you're right ;). I was thinking about it, and Saalangal is much more
complex than I give it credit for. I haven't even figured out how the
verbal system affects the rest of the sentence fully yet. Saalangal relies
a lot on affixes for nouns to indicate what the noun is. The preposition
set is complex in that it's vague (for instance, 'ka' can mean, in, at,
into, etc.). Also, as I said, I made the verb system a bit more complex in
regards to the simple tenses. I also have an extensive set of focuses,
that if someone was trying to learn the language would need to know in
order to understand any possible sentence in Saalangal (but, unlike the
Tagalog focus system which inspired it, the focus always comes at the end
of the verb).

I think that for those who aren't well versed in a focus/trigger system,
it can be a bit difficult, because using certain focuses does away with
certain prepositions, etc (as I showed in the "I learned Swedish in
Uppsala" example earlier). Also depending on what focus you use, the
different parts of the sentence take different markers, and can switch
places (which can easily be construed as articles ;)).

Whew! just thinking about all that makes my head spin.......i think I need
to go re-look at the grammar again and try some sample sentences. But, I
can do that later in the day.

All in all, it really is quite complex, now that I think of it.
>
>
>Bottom-line, what I am trying to say, if not very well, is that we all us
>are engaged in a complex endeavor and the fruits of our labors are in
>different ways complex.  Don't think less of your language because it
>lacks surface "complexity".  Perhaps you have just found a more elegant
>solution to a complex problem.
>
I think you said it well. Your daughter is very smart, I must say :) . I
think she pretty much has it down. I do like languages because I like to
see how things tick (i've always been into taking things apart to see how
they work, and then trying to put them back together again). It is kind of
like a puzzle, really.
>
>
>This has always been, IMHO, the major advantage of artlanging over
>auxlanging.  No one has to approve of your decisions but you!  We are
>free to create very personal languages that express our very personal
>aesthetics and understanding of linguistics.  What fun!
Exactly! I think maybe that's why I get so turned off by the attitudes of
some auxlangers. I don't have to make my language simple, easy to learn,
or pleasing to everyone. I dont have to care at all what critics thing I
should or shouldn't do. I can also use what I find interesting, but not
what the majority thinks are easy or utilitarian. It's all up to me.





________________________________________________

It's worth the risk of burning, to have a second chance...