Re: A spoken-only conlang
- One thing I think that merits mentioning is that although the internet
is a great medium and we could do a lot of this through voice / video
chat - I feel the most natural and productive environment would be a
week long immersion (exmersion?) camp somewhere where conlangers could
> What I'veHmm - I like this point. Lately I've been thinking about how my
> long thought of, if you want to just force people into a place where
> they need to create language, is to give them a medium-- one I've
> thought of is whistling-- where they have few established symbols and
> it's difficult to transfer things.
intuition regarding vocal glossolalia differs from my intuition about
signed glossolalia. I can make up a bunch of words that I think
_sound_ like Anglo Saxon, but I can't make up a bunch of word that
_look_ like ASL. (Even though I've studied ASL.) Similarly, I don't
know what I'd start 'looking for' when coining whistled words.
> On the contrary, I believe it's our mode of conlanging here that'sI don't really know where I stand on this. I think that to describe a
> impractical! Making up languages by becoming amateur linguists,
> speaking in strange jargon and symbols. Hardly anyone is able to make
> it out here to these games.
language accurately you need the kind of technical vocabulary that
linguistics uses. But generally, we don't need to describe languages
accurately, and to use a language we almost never need to describe it.
So - It's unfortunate that two things are as they are: a) more people
aren't using conlangs daily in their everyday lives, as a form of
intricate personal art that they talk about like it was natural and b)
that there ain't no better way to write about language.
- --- In email@example.com, "<deinx nxtxr>" <deinx.nxtxr@...> wrote:
>The special codepoint, ZWSP, is for line breaking when the writer doesn't know how wide the lines will be. It's in very few Thai 8-bit codes, and you very rarely encounter it. Some (most?) software ignores ZWSP and WJ (word joiner), which is very annoying when the dictionary-based line-breaker gets it wrong.
> Larry Sulky wrote:
> > But it would be fair game to denote prosody, right? Which would sometimes
> > mean de facto word-boundary marking, etc.
> > And I wonder if doing something like Kalusa without spaces to mark word
> > boundaries would lead to self-segregating morphotactics. Maybe not, if Thai,
> > as pointed out by Dana, is an example.
> Written Thai doesn't show word boundaries. There is a special
> codepoint used between words even though it doesn't display
> anything. It may have something to do with how the script is displayed.
Educated written Thai doesn't show word boundaries, but I've seen a vacillation between marking syllable and marking word boundaries in less educated Thai, which is a hangover from when Thai children start to write. There's also a New Testament translation into Thai that (visibly) marks word boundaries - presumably because it's easier to read that way!