Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Oh great joy!

Expand Messages
  • BPJ
    I just stuffed together the contents of two old cardboard folders with conlang/conculture papers because I urgently needed a file for something, and out fell a
    Message 1 of 16 , Dec 15, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      I just stuffed together the contents of two old
      cardboard folders with conlang/conculture papers
      because I urgently needed a file for something, and out
      fell a CD disk with conlang stuff, including a version
      of my old Sohlob vocabulary as an .xls file. Alas I can
      easily see that this version is a year or two older
      than the last version which I lost to file lock-in --
      it isn't even converted from the ASCII-based
      transcription to the Latin-1 based![^1] (I suspect this
      file was made as part of just that conversion) --, but
      this can at least be opened with software I still
      possess! I've already backed it up as .ods and .csv.
      Now I must 'only' find time to modernize it and work
      seven years' or so worth of work, spread around a mass
      of text files and paperwork, into it, in parallel with
      similar work on Rhodrese vocabulary... Conlang revival!

      BTW does anyone know if anything special is required to
      convert a 'Latin-1' .xls file to a UTF-8 .ods file with
      OpenOffice? Does the conversion happen automagically
      when saving as a current version .ods, or will I have
      to go through a .csv version which I convert with
      appropriate tools?

      /bpj

      [^1]: I can't believe now I put up with using {q} for
      /ŋ/ in Kijeb but for /ʁ/ in the daughter languages.
      Back when you simply *had* to put up with such! :-)

      For the daughter languages the Latin-1
      transcription is still valid, entitywise: I still
      use {c ç j æ e} for /tɕ ɕ dʑ æ ɨ/ and feel no urge
      to change a settled habit. I have considered
      introducing {ł} instead of {hl} for /ɬ/ but what
      then do with {hm hn hng}, not to mention {hr}? And
      it still may be a good idea to be able to spell
      "Sohlob" in all-ASCII!
    • Adam Walker
      Congratulations. I know what a relief that can be having recently rediscovered notes on several long~forgotten projects. Now if I could just find my Graavgaaln
      Message 2 of 16 , Dec 15, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Congratulations. I know what a relief that can be having recently
        rediscovered notes on several long~forgotten projects. Now if I could
        just find my Graavgaaln dictionary...

        On 12/15/11, BPJ <bpj@...> wrote:
        > I just stuffed together the contents of two old
        > cardboard folders with conlang/conculture papers
        > because I urgently needed a file for something, and out
        > fell a CD disk with conlang stuff, including a version
        > of my old Sohlob vocabulary as an .xls file. Alas I can
        > easily see that this version is a year or two older
        > than the last version which I lost to file lock-in --
        > it isn't even converted from the ASCII-based
        > transcription to the Latin-1 based![^1] (I suspect this
        > file was made as part of just that conversion) --, but
        > this can at least be opened with software I still
        > possess! I've already backed it up as .ods and .csv.
        > Now I must 'only' find time to modernize it and work
        > seven years' or so worth of work, spread around a mass
        > of text files and paperwork, into it, in parallel with
        > similar work on Rhodrese vocabulary... Conlang revival!
        >
        > BTW does anyone know if anything special is required to
        > convert a 'Latin-1' .xls file to a UTF-8 .ods file with
        > OpenOffice? Does the conversion happen automagically
        > when saving as a current version .ods, or will I have
        > to go through a .csv version which I convert with
        > appropriate tools?
        >
        > /bpj
        >
        > [^1]: I can't believe now I put up with using {q} for
        > /ŋ/ in Kijeb but for /ʁ/ in the daughter languages.
        > Back when you simply *had* to put up with such! :-)
        >
        > For the daughter languages the Latin-1
        > transcription is still valid, entitywise: I still
        > use {c ç j æ e} for /tɕ ɕ dʑ æ ɨ/ and feel no urge
        > to change a settled habit. I have considered
        > introducing {ł} instead of {hl} for /ɬ/ but what
        > then do with {hm hn hng}, not to mention {hr}? And
        > it still may be a good idea to be able to spell
        > "Sohlob" in all-ASCII!
        >
      • David McCann
        On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 20:41:06 +0100 ... If it s a real (ISO) Latin-1, there s no problem because that s a subset of Unicode. If it s the Microsoft version of
        Message 3 of 16 , Dec 15, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 20:41:06 +0100
          BPJ <bpj@...> wrote:

          > BTW does anyone know if anything special is required to
          > convert a 'Latin-1' .xls file to a UTF-8 .ods file with
          > OpenOffice? Does the conversion happen automagically
          > when saving as a current version .ods, or will I have
          > to go through a .csv version which I convert with
          > appropriate tools?

          If it's a real (ISO) Latin-1, there's no problem because that's a
          subset of Unicode. If it's the Microsoft version of Latin-1, then "šžœ"
          and true quotation marks will map to control codes. You can try
          loading, but if there are problems use
          iconv -f WINDOWS-1252 -t UTF8 inputfile
          (unless it's DOS Latin-1, which is 850).
        • BPJ
          ... Not really: everything above U+007F is multi-byte in UTF-8, so if the data in the file aren t converted to UTF-8 I m in for trouble. ... Yes, but *if* OOo
          Message 4 of 16 , Dec 16, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            On 2011-12-16 00:03, David McCann wrote:
            > On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 20:41:06 +0100
            > BPJ<bpj@...> wrote:
            >
            >> BTW does anyone know if anything special is required to
            >> convert a 'Latin-1' .xls file to a UTF-8 .ods file with
            >> OpenOffice? Does the conversion happen automagically
            >> when saving as a current version .ods, or will I have
            >> to go through a .csv version which I convert with
            >> appropriate tools?
            >
            > If it's a real (ISO) Latin-1, there's no problem because that's a
            > subset of Unicode.

            Not really: everything above U+007F is multi-byte in UTF-8,
            so if the data in the file aren't converted to UTF-8 I'm in for
            trouble.

            > If it's the Microsoft version of Latin-1, then "šžœ"
            > and true quotation marks will map to control codes.

            Yes, but *if* OOo converts automatically it hopefully
            expects .xls files that old being cp1252.

            > You can try
            > loading, but if there are problems use
            > iconv -f WINDOWS-1252 -t UTF8 inputfile
            > (unless it's DOS Latin-1, which is 850).
            >

            I know how to do it. The question is whether I *need* to do it.

            /bpj
          • Michael Everson
            ... Apple Pages might be a safe way to deal with the UTF-8 export; Pages can export to .xls and .csv, and would convert Latin-1 to UTF-8 when it reads the file
            Message 5 of 16 , Dec 16, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              On 15 Dec 2011, at 19:41, BPJ wrote:

              > BTW does anyone know if anything special is required to convert a 'Latin-1' .xls file to a UTF-8 .ods file with OpenOffice? Does the conversion happen automagically when saving as a current version .ods, or will I have to go through a .csv version which I convert with appropriate tools?

              Apple Pages might be a safe way to deal with the UTF-8 export; Pages can export to .xls and .csv, and would convert Latin-1 to UTF-8 when it reads the file in.

              Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
            • BPJ
              ... Alas my computer doesn t have an apple on it, but a penguin (figuratively speaking) /bpj
              Message 6 of 16 , Dec 16, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                On 2011-12-16 20:22, Michael Everson wrote:
                > On 15 Dec 2011, at 19:41, BPJ wrote:
                >
                >> BTW does anyone know if anything special is required to convert a 'Latin-1' .xls file to a UTF-8 .ods file with OpenOffice? Does the conversion happen automagically when saving as a current version .ods, or will I have to go through a .csv version which I convert with appropriate tools?
                >
                > Apple Pages might be a safe way to deal with the UTF-8 export; Pages can export to .xls and .csv, and would convert Latin-1 to UTF-8 when it reads the file in.
                >
                > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
                >

                Alas my computer doesn't have an apple on it, but a penguin
                (figuratively speaking)

                /bpj
              • Michael Everson
                ... And you don t know anyone else with a computer? Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
                Message 7 of 16 , Dec 16, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 16 Dec 2011, at 19:41, BPJ wrote:

                  > Alas my computer doesn't have an apple on it, but a penguin (figuratively speaking)

                  And you don't know anyone else with a computer?

                  Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
                • BPJ
                  ... O sure, even one or two Mac owners who owe me a favor, but I was impatient! It turned out OOo was up to the task. It apparently did things automatically
                  Message 8 of 16 , Dec 17, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On 2011-12-17 02:49, Michael Everson wrote:
                    > On 16 Dec 2011, at 19:41, BPJ wrote:
                    >
                    >> Alas my computer doesn't have an apple on it, but a penguin (figuratively speaking)
                    >
                    > And you don't know anyone else with a computer?

                    O sure, even one or two Mac owners who owe me a favor,
                    but I was impatient! It turned out OOo was up to the
                    task. It apparently did things automatically and
                    happily exported to UTF-8 csv. I just had to uncheck
                    some box so that it converted any U+0022 in the fields'
                    contents to curly quotes and the csv didn't appear
                    broken to Text::CSV_XS.

                    Actually the whole exercise *was* unnecessary since the
                    ASCII transcription of Sohlob can be correctly
                    converted to the Latin-1 transcription with ordinary
                    search&replace as long as tj --> c and sj --> ç are
                    done before dj --> j, and q --> ŋ in the Kijeb (or as
                    the old file had it KEJEB) column would of course be no
                    problem either. After all the conversion (with q --> ñ
                    rather than q --> ŋ) was done that way seven years ago,
                    that being the probable reason the xls file existed in
                    the first place. In short I was playing too smart, but
                    I'll need to be able to parse the thing as exported to
                    csv later in order to run the sound change applier
                    (once I've updated Kijeb entries as needed). The sound
                    changes have changed a good deal too in seven years! :-)

                    BTW the OOo help system apparently doesn't even have an
                    entry for "encoding" -- or at least for any of the
                    usual Swedish translations. So much for their trust in
                    users' savvy and intelligence!

                    /bpj
                  • Eric Christopherson
                    ... What format is the other stuff locked into? ... I ve wondered for a while this question: Does anyone have terminology to describe the changes a language
                    Message 9 of 16 , Dec 19, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Dec 15, 2011, at 1:41 PM, BPJ wrote:

                      > I just stuffed together the contents of two old
                      > cardboard folders with conlang/conculture papers
                      > because I urgently needed a file for something, and out
                      > fell a CD disk with conlang stuff, including a version
                      > of my old Sohlob vocabulary as an .xls file. Alas I can
                      > easily see that this version is a year or two older
                      > than the last version which I lost to file lock-in --
                      > it isn't even converted from the ASCII-based
                      > transcription to the Latin-1 based![^1] (I suspect this
                      > file was made as part of just that conversion) --, but
                      > this can at least be opened with software I still
                      > possess!

                      What format is the other stuff locked into?

                      On Dec 17, 2011, at 7:02 AM, BPJ wrote:

                      > I'll need to be able to parse the thing as exported to
                      > csv later in order to run the sound change applier
                      > (once I've updated Kijeb entries as needed). The sound
                      > changes have changed a good deal too in seven years! :-)

                      I've wondered for a while this question: Does anyone have terminology to describe the changes a language goes through in "con"time, versus the changes the language (in its various diachronic stages, if it's diachronic) goes through in real time?

                      As an example, the first type of change would be the changes Kijeb's sound change applier described; the second type of change would be the changes the applier itself goes through in this timeline.
                    • David McCann
                      On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 22:30:14 -0600 ... I use external history (e.g. the process of revising Romlang A into Liburnese) and internal history (the
                      Message 10 of 16 , Dec 20, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 22:30:14 -0600
                        Eric Christopherson <rakko@...> wrote:
                        > I've wondered for a while this question: Does anyone have terminology
                        > to describe the changes a language goes through in "con"time, versus
                        > the changes the language (in its various diachronic stages, if it's
                        > diachronic) goes through in real time?

                        I use 'external history' (e.g. the process of revising Romlang A into
                        Liburnese) and 'internal history' (the orthographic experiments of the
                        19th century and the ongoing change of [ř] into [ž]).
                      • And Rosta
                        ... But in historical linguistics, internal history covers how the language itself has changed and external history covers the sociocultural influences on
                        Message 11 of 16 , Dec 20, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment
                          David McCann, On 20/12/2011 16:37:
                          > On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 22:30:14 -0600
                          > Eric Christopherson<rakko@...> wrote:
                          >> I've wondered for a while this question: Does anyone have terminology
                          >> to describe the changes a language goes through in "con"time, versus
                          >> the changes the language (in its various diachronic stages, if it's
                          >> diachronic) goes through in real time?
                          >
                          > I use 'external history' (e.g. the process of revising Romlang A into
                          > Liburnese) and 'internal history' (the orthographic experiments of the
                          > 19th century and the ongoing change of [ř] into [ž]).

                          But in historical linguistics, 'internal history' covers how the language itself has changed and 'external history' covers the sociocultural influences on the language. E.g. for English, loss of inflection is part of internal history and diglossia in the Danelaw is part of external history.

                          I use the terms 'intrafictional' and 'extrafictional' for the distinction Eric asked about.

                          --And.
                        • Jörg Rhiemeier
                          Hallo conlangers! ... Yes. The convention used by David McCann is widespread in the conlang scene, perhaps because Helge Fauskanger uses it in his (excellent)
                          Message 12 of 16 , Dec 20, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hallo conlangers!

                            On Tuesday 20 December 2011 19:26:09 And Rosta wrote:

                            > David McCann, On 20/12/2011 16:37:
                            > > On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 22:30:14 -0600
                            > >
                            > > Eric Christopherson<rakko@...> wrote:
                            > >> I've wondered for a while this question: Does anyone have terminology
                            > >> to describe the changes a language goes through in "con"time, versus
                            > >> the changes the language (in its various diachronic stages, if it's
                            > >> diachronic) goes through in real time?
                            > >
                            > > I use 'external history' (e.g. the process of revising Romlang A into
                            > > Liburnese) and 'internal history' (the orthographic experiments of the
                            > > 19th century and the ongoing change of [ř] into [ž]).
                            >
                            > But in historical linguistics, 'internal history' covers how the language
                            > itself has changed and 'external history' covers the sociocultural
                            > influences on the language. E.g. for English, loss of inflection is part
                            > of internal history and diglossia in the Danelaw is part of external
                            > history.

                            Yes. The convention used by David McCann is widespread in the
                            conlang scene, perhaps because Helge Fauskanger uses it in his
                            (excellent) web pages on Tolkien's languages. But thanks for
                            alerting us about the actual usage of _internal history_ and
                            _external history_ in historical linguistics; the, as I shall
                            call it here, "Ardalambion" convention is indeed rather
                            misleading, and it hadn't felt right to me, either.

                            > I use the terms 'intrafictional' and 'extrafictional' for the distinction
                            > Eric asked about.

                            Yes, that is a good and unambiguous pair of adjectives, and also
                            quite commonly encountered in description of fictional languages.
                            Other possibilities include _project history_ or _meta-history_
                            for extrafictional history and _in-world history_ for
                            intrafictional history, but _extrafictional_ and _intrafictional_
                            form a nice and consistent pair.

                            --
                            ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                            http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
                            "Bêsel asa Êm, a Êm atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Êmel." - SiM 1:1
                          • David McCann
                            On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:26:09 +0000 ... But it s hardly likely to cause confusion to use the same term differently for conlangs and natlangs. I suppose you
                            Message 13 of 16 , Dec 21, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 18:26:09 +0000
                              And Rosta <and.rosta@...> wrote:
                              > But in historical linguistics, 'internal history' covers how the
                              > language itself has changed and 'external history' covers the
                              > sociocultural influences on the language. E.g. for English, loss of
                              > inflection is part of internal history and diglossia in the Danelaw
                              > is part of external history.
                              >
                              > I use the terms 'intrafictional' and 'extrafictional' for the
                              > distinction Eric asked about.

                              But it's hardly likely to cause confusion to use the same term
                              differently for conlangs and natlangs. I suppose you could say a
                              discussion of Orsinian loans in Liburnese is a case of external history
                              in one sense and internal history in the other, but I'm all for
                              wielding Occam's Razor; there are too many terms in linguistics already.
                            • BPJ
                              Sorry for laaate reply. I ve been busy practically around the clock all week, and had time to really look through backmail only now. ... .fp7 i.e. FileMaker
                              Message 14 of 16 , Dec 25, 2011
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Sorry for laaate reply. I've been busy practically
                                around the clock all week, and had time to really look through
                                backmail only now.

                                On 2011-12-20 05:30, Eric Christopherson wrote:
                                > On Dec 15, 2011, at 1:41 PM, BPJ wrote:
                                >
                                >> I just stuffed together the contents of two old
                                >> cardboard folders with conlang/conculture papers
                                >> because I urgently needed a file for something, and out
                                >> fell a CD disk with conlang stuff, including a version
                                >> of my old Sohlob vocabulary as an .xls file. Alas I can
                                >> easily see that this version is a year or two older
                                >> than the last version which I lost to file lock-in --
                                >> it isn't even converted from the ASCII-based
                                >> transcription to the Latin-1 based![^1] (I suspect this
                                >> file was made as part of just that conversion) --, but
                                >> this can at least be opened with software I still
                                >> possess!
                                >
                                > What format is the other stuff locked into?

                                .fp7 i.e. FileMaker Pro 7 (for Windoze).

                                >
                                > On Dec 17, 2011, at 7:02 AM, BPJ wrote:
                                >
                                >> I'll need to be able to parse the thing as exported to
                                >> csv later in order to run the sound change applier
                                >> (once I've updated Kijeb entries as needed). The sound
                                >> changes have changed a good deal too in seven years! :-)
                                >

                                > I've wondered for a while this question: Does anyone
                                > have terminology to describe the changes a language
                                > goes through in "con"time, versus the changes the
                                > language (in its various diachronic stages, if it's
                                > diachronic) goes through in real time?

                                > As an example, the first type of change would be the
                                > changes Kijeb's sound change applier described; the
                                > second type of change would be the changes the
                                > applier itself goes through in this timeline.

                                As it happens I do! I call the con-time stages 'stages'
                                (in part because the con-time is the theatrical stage
                                where the con-history of the lang unfolds) and the
                                real-time stages 'revisions', because they are the
                                result of conscious decisions on the part of the
                                conlanger. See the bottom of p. 9 and most of p. 10 in:

                                <http://books.google.com/books?id=vSCKWYbL63oC&lpg=PP1&vq=revision&pg=PA9#v=twopage&q=revision&f=false>

                                (Much of what I theorized there about *Tolkien's*
                                revisioning doesn't seem to tally with evidence in
                                material published since then, so I guess what is valid
                                in that essay is the general theory of historical
                                conlanging in it.)

                                Similarly I'd talk of 'changes' in the con-history of
                                the lang and 'alterations' in the real-world writeup
                                for implementing those changes -- whether the 'writeup'
                                be a program, a piece of paper or only in mental
                                storage -- and of 'periods'[^note] in the con-history
                                but 'phases' in the real-history, including phases within
                                revisions.

                                [^note]: Although 'periods' overlaps dangerously with 'stages'
                                the difference is between a time period in con-time
                                viewed from 'within' ('endopoetically') and a more or
                                less discrete part, or 'chapter', of the con-history
                                viewed from 'without' ('exopoetically') as a piece of
                                fiction.

                                Maybe not everyone feels a need for so finegrained a
                                terminology, but I feel it helps me thinking about what
                                I'm doing. I have a feeling we don't have as much
                                terminology for _conlanging_ as we do for _conlangs_,
                                and that's in a way a pity, not least because if you
                                want to raise the status of an art form you need to be
                                able to hold discourse about its practice as well as
                                its matter.

                                /bpj
                              • Eric Christopherson
                                ... Not a problem :) ... Is the problem that you don t have Windows anymore, or FileMaker Pro? ... Very interesting, and the piece you wrote looks interesting
                                Message 15 of 16 , Dec 25, 2011
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  On Dec 25, 2011, at 8:01 PM, BPJ wrote:

                                  > Sorry for laaate reply. I've been busy practically
                                  > around the clock all week, and had time to really look through
                                  > backmail only now.

                                  Not a problem :)

                                  >
                                  > On 2011-12-20 05:30, Eric Christopherson wrote:
                                  >> On Dec 15, 2011, at 1:41 PM, BPJ wrote:
                                  >>
                                  >>> I just stuffed together the contents of two old
                                  >>> cardboard folders with conlang/conculture papers
                                  >>> because I urgently needed a file for something, and out
                                  >>> fell a CD disk with conlang stuff, including a version
                                  >>> of my old Sohlob vocabulary as an .xls file. Alas I can
                                  >>> easily see that this version is a year or two older
                                  >>> than the last version which I lost to file lock-in --
                                  >>> it isn't even converted from the ASCII-based
                                  >>> transcription to the Latin-1 based![^1] (I suspect this
                                  >>> file was made as part of just that conversion) --, but
                                  >>> this can at least be opened with software I still
                                  >>> possess!
                                  >>
                                  >> What format is the other stuff locked into?
                                  >
                                  > .fp7 i.e. FileMaker Pro 7 (for Windoze).

                                  Is the problem that you don't have Windows anymore, or FileMaker Pro?

                                  >
                                  >>
                                  >> On Dec 17, 2011, at 7:02 AM, BPJ wrote:
                                  >>
                                  >>> I'll need to be able to parse the thing as exported to
                                  >>> csv later in order to run the sound change applier
                                  >>> (once I've updated Kijeb entries as needed). The sound
                                  >>> changes have changed a good deal too in seven years! :-)
                                  >>
                                  >
                                  >> I've wondered for a while this question: Does anyone
                                  >> have terminology to describe the changes a language
                                  >> goes through in "con"time, versus the changes the
                                  >> language (in its various diachronic stages, if it's
                                  >> diachronic) goes through in real time?
                                  >
                                  >> As an example, the first type of change would be the
                                  >> changes Kijeb's sound change applier described; the
                                  >> second type of change would be the changes the
                                  >> applier itself goes through in this timeline.
                                  >
                                  > As it happens I do! I call the con-time stages 'stages'
                                  > (in part because the con-time is the theatrical stage
                                  > where the con-history of the lang unfolds) and the
                                  > real-time stages 'revisions', because they are the
                                  > result of conscious decisions on the part of the
                                  > conlanger. See the bottom of p. 9 and most of p. 10 in:
                                  >
                                  > <http://books.google.com/books?id=vSCKWYbL63oC&lpg=PP1&vq=revision&pg=PA9#v=twopage&q=revision&f=false>
                                  >
                                  > (Much of what I theorized there about *Tolkien's*
                                  > revisioning doesn't seem to tally with evidence in
                                  > material published since then, so I guess what is valid
                                  > in that essay is the general theory of historical
                                  > conlanging in it.)
                                  >
                                  > Similarly I'd talk of 'changes' in the con-history of
                                  > the lang and 'alterations' in the real-world writeup
                                  > for implementing those changes -- whether the 'writeup'
                                  > be a program, a piece of paper or only in mental
                                  > storage -- and of 'periods'[^note] in the con-history
                                  > but 'phases' in the real-history, including phases within
                                  > revisions.
                                  >
                                  > [^note]: Although 'periods' overlaps dangerously with 'stages'
                                  > the difference is between a time period in con-time
                                  > viewed from 'within' ('endopoetically') and a more or
                                  > less discrete part, or 'chapter', of the con-history
                                  > viewed from 'without' ('exopoetically') as a piece of
                                  > fiction.
                                  >
                                  > Maybe not everyone feels a need for so finegrained a
                                  > terminology, but I feel it helps me thinking about what
                                  > I'm doing. I have a feeling we don't have as much
                                  > terminology for _conlanging_ as we do for _conlangs_,
                                  > and that's in a way a pity, not least because if you
                                  > want to raise the status of an art form you need to be
                                  > able to hold discourse about its practice as well as
                                  > its matter.
                                  >
                                  > /bpj

                                  Very interesting, and the piece you wrote looks interesting too. I see we have a few overlapping terms to choose from. I know what you mean about not everyone needing a finegrained terminology, but I think (like you) it's useful when speaking about the craft.

                                  I'm also glad you used the word _revision_, as my grand idea in relation to the question I asked was to find or develop some sort of revision control system for conlangs, viz. one that would track both exopoetic/extrafictional revisions *and* endopoetic/intrafictional stages.

                                  It's just a hint of an idea so far though.
                                • BPJ
                                  ... The latter, i.e. no FMP, and usually no Windoze either, though that can be solved across the corridor, should need arise. ... [snip] ... The problem with
                                  Message 16 of 16 , Dec 26, 2011
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    On 2011-12-26 05:51, Eric Christopherson wrote:
                                    > On Dec 25, 2011, at 8:01 PM, BPJ wrote:
                                    >
                                    >> Sorry for laaate reply. I've been busy practically
                                    >> around the clock all week, and had time to really look through
                                    >> backmail only now.
                                    >
                                    > Not a problem :)
                                    >
                                    >>
                                    >> On 2011-12-20 05:30, Eric Christopherson wrote:
                                    >>> On Dec 15, 2011, at 1:41 PM, BPJ wrote:
                                    >>>
                                    >>>> I just stuffed together the contents of two old
                                    >>>> cardboard folders with conlang/conculture papers
                                    >>>> because I urgently needed a file for something, and out
                                    >>>> fell a CD disk with conlang stuff, including a version
                                    >>>> of my old Sohlob vocabulary as an .xls file. Alas I can
                                    >>>> easily see that this version is a year or two older
                                    >>>> than the last version which I lost to file lock-in --
                                    >>>> it isn't even converted from the ASCII-based
                                    >>>> transcription to the Latin-1 based![^1] (I suspect this
                                    >>>> file was made as part of just that conversion) --, but
                                    >>>> this can at least be opened with software I still
                                    >>>> possess!
                                    >>>
                                    >>> What format is the other stuff locked into?
                                    >>
                                    >> .fp7 i.e. FileMaker Pro 7 (for Windoze).
                                    >
                                    > Is the problem that you don't have Windows anymore, or FileMaker Pro?

                                    The latter, i.e. no FMP, and usually no Windoze either,
                                    though that can be solved across the corridor, should need
                                    arise.

                                    >>> On Dec 17, 2011, at 7:02 AM, BPJ wrote:

                                    [snip]

                                    > Very interesting, and the piece you wrote looks
                                    > interesting too. I see we have a few overlapping
                                    > terms to choose from. I know what you mean about not
                                    > everyone needing a finegrained terminology, but I
                                    > think (like you) it's useful when speaking about the
                                    > craft.
                                    >
                                    > I'm also glad you used the word _revision_, as my
                                    > grand idea in relation to the question I asked was to
                                    > find or develop some sort of revision control system
                                    > for conlangs, viz. one that would track both
                                    > exopoetic/extrafictional revisions *and*
                                    > endopoetic/intrafictional stages.

                                    The problem with that is of course that you
                                    two time axes there, as I wrote in the paper.
                                    You'd need references or pointers of some kind
                                    to achive that.

                                    >
                                    > It's just a hint of an idea so far though.

                                    I could sure need it. I'm just now learning to
                                    use revision control systems though, and could
                                    have use for a "Revision Control for Dummies".
                                    You (or anyone on the list) don't happen to
                                    know of (a good and free) one?

                                    If you are collecting feature requests I have
                                    one: storage should be based on text files!

                                    /bpj
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.