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

Re: On Creating Altlangs

Expand Messages
  • James Kane
    What do you mean exactly by altlang? What are the details of your project? James
    Message 1 of 28 , Feb 17, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      What do you mean exactly by altlang? What are the details of your project?

      James

      On 18/02/2013, at 9:50 AM, Cosman246 <yashtulsyan@...> wrote:

      > Hello. I'm thinking of creating an altlang; does anyone here have advice or
      > experience to guide someone new to altlangs?
      >
      > (To clarify: I am a student of linguistics in pursuit of a bachelor's
      > degree, and I am already working on one artlang as well. I had a previous
      > auxlang project, but I found it too linguistically naïve when I looked over
      > it again after several years of forgetting about it.)
      >
      > -Yash Tulsyan
    • Cosman246
      ... By altlang, I mean something like Brithenig or Wenedyk. My project is something similar, but instead of Latin disguised as {Welsh, Polish}, it will be a
      Message 2 of 28 , Feb 17, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        >What do you mean exactly by altlang? What are the details of your project?
        By altlang, I mean something like Brithenig or Wenedyk. My project is
        something similar, but instead of Latin disguised as {Welsh, Polish}, it
        will be a Germanic language disguised as an East Slavic language. In this
        respect, it is similar to Syldavian, but done with, hopefully, more care.
        -Yash Tulsyan


        On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 1:32 PM, James Kane <kanejam@...> wrote:

        > What do you mean exactly by altlang? What are the details of your project?
        >
        > James
        >
        > On 18/02/2013, at 9:50 AM, Cosman246 <yashtulsyan@...> wrote:
        >
        > > Hello. I'm thinking of creating an altlang; does anyone here have advice
        > or
        > > experience to guide someone new to altlangs?
        > >
        > > (To clarify: I am a student of linguistics in pursuit of a bachelor's
        > > degree, and I am already working on one artlang as well. I had a previous
        > > auxlang project, but I found it too linguistically naïve when I looked
        > over
        > > it again after several years of forgetting about it.)
        > >
        > > -Yash Tulsyan
        >
      • James Kane
        I know those languages as bogolangs. I think it depends on how closely you want your language to resemble your target language. The important thing is to get
        Message 3 of 28 , Feb 17, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          I know those languages as bogolangs. I think it depends on how closely you want your language to resemble your target language. The important thing is to get the phonology the same, but your morphology can vary from recognisably Germanic to very Slavic.

          Personally I would perform sound changes to get between two languages with similar morphology i.e. proto-Germanic and proto-Slavic and then perform the relevant East Slavic sound changes.

          To make things interesting you can mimic meaning changes as well. I don't know any Slavic examples but as an example casa vs. domo in Romance languages



          On 18/02/2013, at 1:59 PM, Cosman246 <yashtulsyan@...> wrote:

          >> What do you mean exactly by altlang? What are the details of your project?
          > By altlang, I mean something like Brithenig or Wenedyk. My project is
          > something similar, but instead of Latin disguised as {Welsh, Polish}, it
          > will be a Germanic language disguised as an East Slavic language. In this
          > respect, it is similar to Syldavian, but done with, hopefully, more care.
          > -Yash Tulsyan
          >
          >
          > On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 1:32 PM, James Kane <kanejam@...> wrote:
          >
          >> What do you mean exactly by altlang? What are the details of your project?
          >>
          >> James
          >>
          >> On 18/02/2013, at 9:50 AM, Cosman246 <yashtulsyan@...> wrote:
          >>
          >>> Hello. I'm thinking of creating an altlang; does anyone here have advice
          >> or
          >>> experience to guide someone new to altlangs?
          >>>
          >>> (To clarify: I am a student of linguistics in pursuit of a bachelor's
          >>> degree, and I am already working on one artlang as well. I had a previous
          >>> auxlang project, but I found it too linguistically naïve when I looked
          >> over
          >>> it again after several years of forgetting about it.)
          >>>
          >>> -Yash Tulsyan
          >>
        • R A Brown
          On 18/02/2013 00:59, Cosman246 wrote: [snip] ... So you think Brithenig is Latin disguised as Welsh? There are, of course, important differences between
          Message 4 of 28 , Feb 18, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            On 18/02/2013 00:59, Cosman246 wrote:
            [snip]
            > By altlang, I mean something like Brithenig or Wenedyk.
            > My project is something similar, but instead of Latin
            > disguised as {Welsh, Polish},

            So you think Brithenig is Latin disguised as Welsh? There
            are, of course, important differences between Brithenig and
            Welsh. Brithenig spelling uses both 'hard' and 'soft' _c-
            and _g_ very much in the Italian manner, and not at all with
            uniformly hard sounds as in Welsh; and the use of _u_ and,
            to a large extent, _y- is quite different also.

            But the overall effect is does have a Welsh feel - not
            helped, IMO, by Brithenig using _f_ = [v], and _ff_ = [f].

            > it will be a Germanic language disguised as an East
            > Slavic language. In this respect, it is similar to
            > Syldavian, but done with, hopefully, more care.
            ====================================================

            On 18/02/2013 04:47, James Kane wrote:
            > I know those languages as bogolangs.

            So do I.

            I think, however, there is a useful difference between
            altlang & bogolang. I would use altlang to denote a
            language that might _plausibly_ have developed in an
            alternative history.

            I would classify Jörg's "Old Albanic" as an altlang.

            Two or three years ago I wrote a short story for a creative
            writing group I belong which was set in a modern Britain
            where Harold Godwinson had defeated William of Normandy in
            1066, thus preserving English from the flood of Norman
            French borrowings etc. I did include one or two examples of
            the alternate modern English, but never worked the language
            out in detail. But if I had worked out the language more
            fully, that would have been an altlang. It certainly would
            not have been a bogolang.

            My understanding is that Brithenig did start out as an
            altlang: What would modern British Romance be like if spoken
            Latin had survived the withdrawal of the legions? But IMO
            it did lean too far in the bogolang direction. It certainly
            gives that appearance.

            But things like Breathanach, Þrjótrunn and Wenedyk do seem
            to me genuine bogolangs.

            > I think it depends on how closely you want your language
            > to resemble your target language. T

            Indeed - and also whether it is a genuine altlang, i.e. the
            way a language might plausibly have developed if history had
            been different, or whether it is a bogolang, i.e. early
            Germanic with the sound changes of a Slavonic group.

            The usual way of developing a bogolang AIUI is to take an
            early form of a language, e.g. Vulgar Latin, Norse, Old
            English, Old High German etc and apply the sound changes of
            a different language group over a similar period of time.

            [snip]

            > Personally I would perform sound changes to get between
            > two languages with similar morphology i.e.
            > proto-Germanic and proto-Slavic and then perform the
            > relevant East Slavic sound changes.

            It would certainly produce a bogolang. Personally, I don't
            find these very interesting, except as an odd curiosity.
            More interesting IMO is to try to imagine what might have
            developed if, through some chance of history, the language
            situation in some particular area had been different from
            what it is.

            Every so often I think if I ever the time, I might try to
            produce what I think a modern British Romancelang would be
            like; or I might revive the alternate TAKE world again - tho
            the fear of it going the way of Ill Bethisad really puts me
            off - and envisaging, say, the modern Hellenic of Gaul.

            --
            Ray
            ==================================
            http://www.carolandray.plus.com
            ==================================
            "language … began with half-musical unanalysed expressions
            for individual beings and events."
            [Otto Jespersen, Progress in Language, 1895]
          • Jörg Rhiemeier
            Hallo conlangers! ... Correct. ... Yes. The what-if assumption in Old Albic (not Albanic ) is What if we knew what language was spoken in the British
            Message 5 of 28 , Feb 18, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Hallo conlangers!

              On Monday 18 February 2013 14:58:54 R A Brown wrote:

              > [...]
              > On 18/02/2013 04:47, James Kane wrote:
              > > I know those languages as bogolangs.
              >
              > So do I.
              >
              > I think, however, there is a useful difference between
              > altlang & bogolang. I would use altlang to denote a
              > language that might _plausibly_ have developed in an
              > alternative history.

              Correct.

              > I would classify Jörg's "Old Albanic" as an altlang.

              Yes. The "what-if" assumption in Old Albic (not "Albanic") is
              "What if we knew what language was spoken in the British Isles
              before those lands became Celtic-speaking?". Otherwise, the
              world in which Old Albic is spoken is like ours. Of course,
              we cannot know whether the languages spoken in pre-Celtic
              Britain were anything like Old Albic or not. Probably, those
              languages have very little to do with Old Albic, even though
              I have worked some faint clues we *do* have on them into my
              conlang.

              And of course, Old Albic is not at all a bogolang.

              > Two or three years ago I wrote a short story for a creative
              > writing group I belong which was set in a modern Britain
              > where Harold Godwinson had defeated William of Normandy in
              > 1066, thus preserving English from the flood of Norman
              > French borrowings etc. I did include one or two examples of
              > the alternate modern English, but never worked the language
              > out in detail. But if I had worked out the language more
              > fully, that would have been an altlang. It certainly would
              > not have been a bogolang.

              Certainly not!

              > My understanding is that Brithenig did start out as an
              > altlang: What would modern British Romance be like if spoken
              > Latin had survived the withdrawal of the legions? But IMO
              > it did lean too far in the bogolang direction. It certainly
              > gives that appearance.

              Yes. Brithenig is not really a bogolang, but it gets close, and
              is guilty of treading loose a wave of bogolangs.

              > But things like Breathanach, Þrjótrunn and Wenedyk do seem
              > to me genuine bogolangs.

              Right. They are not only made by grafting some other language's
              sound changes on Latin, but are also meant to be spoken in areas
              outside the Roman Empire at its largest extent.

              My own Roman Germanech is a near-bogolang, being based on slightly
              modified sound changes of German applied to Vulgar Latin. I must
              confess that it is not really a good conlang. Indeed, I have no
              plans with it other than writing up a grammar sketch with a few
              text samples and a small vocabulary, putting it on my web site
              - and leaving it at that. Good riddance! It is not particularly
              plausible, neither as a language from an alternative history
              where Varus defeated Arminius (the original scenario), nor as a
              lostlang set in the Odenwald (the current scenario).

              > > I think it depends on how closely you want your language
              > >
              > > to resemble your target language. T
              >
              > Indeed - and also whether it is a genuine altlang, i.e. the
              > way a language might plausibly have developed if history had
              > been different, or whether it is a bogolang, i.e. early
              > Germanic with the sound changes of a Slavonic group.

              Yes. That is a difference. Of course, we cannot say that a
              bogolang was *impossible* - it is just very unlikely, and also
              not a particularly interesting thing to do.

              > The usual way of developing a bogolang AIUI is to take an
              > early form of a language, e.g. Vulgar Latin, Norse, Old
              > English, Old High German etc and apply the sound changes of
              > a different language group over a similar period of time.

              Yes, that is the definition of "bogolang".

              > [snip]
              >
              > > Personally I would perform sound changes to get between
              > > two languages with similar morphology i.e.
              > > proto-Germanic and proto-Slavic and then perform the
              > > relevant East Slavic sound changes.
              >
              > It would certainly produce a bogolang. Personally, I don't
              > find these very interesting, except as an odd curiosity.

              Amen! This usually does not yield particularly interesting
              results, and applying sound changes of language A to language B
              does not work well. I have tried with Roman Germanech, I do not
              wish to try again!

              > More interesting IMO is to try to imagine what might have
              > developed if, through some chance of history, the language
              > situation in some particular area had been different from
              > what it is.

              Yes, and the best way of exploring this is not assuming that the
              same sound changes that happened *here* happened *there* as well,
              only to a different language! Sound changes are always responses
              on the developmental possibilities the phonology of a particular
              language offers, and once you replace that language by another
              language with a different phonology (and no two languages have
              the same phonology), those possibilities are changed, and thus
              also the responses.

              > Every so often I think if I ever the time, I might try to
              > produce what I think a modern British Romancelang would be
              > like; or I might revive the alternate TAKE world again - tho
              > the fear of it going the way of Ill Bethisad really puts me
              > off - and envisaging, say, the modern Hellenic of Gaul.

              But not by applying the sound changes of French to Koine Greek ;)

              --
              ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
              http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
              "Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1
            • And Rosta
              ... If you ever do find the time, I ll read the results with great interest. My first guess, made from a position of near-ignorance on my part, is that it
              Message 6 of 28 , Feb 18, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                R A Brown, On 18/02/2013 13:58:
                > Every so often I think if I ever the time, I might try to
                > produce what I think a modern British Romancelang would be
                > like;

                If you ever do find the time, I'll read the results with great interest.

                My first guess, made from a position of near-ignorance on my part, is that it would be rather like northern French. If that guess is along the right lines, then a further question would be in what ways it might be expected to differ from northern French.

                --And.
              • James Kane
                I have done a Vulgar Latin descended from proto-Germanic which isn t too bad because the cases and tenses of proto-Germanic collapse nicely, but there was a
                Message 7 of 28 , Feb 18, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  I have done a Vulgar Latin descended from proto-Germanic which isn't too bad because the cases and tenses of proto-Germanic collapse nicely, but there was a bit of tempering of the phonology.

                  Obviously altlangs are much more interesting to do but bogolangs are good for beginners who wish to explore diachronic sound changes without as much effort.

                  On 19/02/2013, at 9:58 AM, And Rosta <and.rosta@...> wrote:

                  > R A Brown, On 18/02/2013 13:58:
                  >> Every so often I think if I ever the time, I might try to
                  >> produce what I think a modern British Romancelang would be
                  >> like;
                  >
                  > If you ever do find the time, I'll read the results with great interest.
                  >
                  > My first guess, made from a position of near-ignorance on my part, is that it would be rather like northern French. If that guess is along the right lines, then a further question would be in what ways it might be expected to differ from northern French.
                  >
                  > --And.
                • R A Brown
                  ... [snip] ... OOPS - sorry! ... Yes. ... It certainly ain t. [snip] ... I agree on both points. [snip] ... I cannot think of any actual examples among
                  Message 8 of 28 , Feb 19, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On 18/02/2013 20:43, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
                    > Hallo conlangers!
                    >
                    > On Monday 18 February 2013 14:58:54 R A Brown wrote:
                    [snip]

                    >> I would classify Jörg's "Old Albanic" as an altlang.
                    >
                    > Yes. The "what-if" assumption in Old Albic (not
                    > "Albanic")

                    OOPS - sorry!

                    > is "What if we knew what language was spoken in the
                    > British Isles before those lands became
                    > Celtic-speaking?".

                    Yes.

                    > And of course, Old Albic is not at all a bogolang.

                    It certainly ain't.

                    [snip]
                    >
                    >> My understanding is that Brithenig did start out as an
                    >> altlang: What would modern British Romance be like if
                    >> spoken Latin had survived the withdrawal of the
                    >> legions? But IMO it did lean too far in the bogolang
                    >> direction. It certainly gives that appearance.
                    >
                    > Yes. Brithenig is not really a bogolang, but it gets
                    > close, and is guilty of treading loose a wave of
                    > bogolangs.

                    I agree on both points.

                    [snip]
                    >>
                    >> Indeed - and also whether it is a genuine altlang, i.e.
                    >> the way a language might plausibly have developed if
                    >> history had been different, or whether it is a
                    >> bogolang, i.e. early Germanic with the sound changes of
                    >> a Slavonic group.
                    >
                    > Yes. That is a difference. Of course, we cannot say
                    > that a bogolang was *impossible* - it is just very
                    > unlikely,

                    I cannot think of any actual examples among natlangs. The
                    Slav influence on Romanian is obvious, and French acquired
                    the front rounded vowels of neighboring Germanic, but
                    neither are bogolangs. Creole are often cited as taking one
                    language and applying the phonology of another, but the
                    results certainly do not resemble bogolangs.
                    ============================================================

                    On 18/02/2013 20:58, And Rosta wrote:
                    > R A Brown, On 18/02/2013 13:58:
                    >> Every so often I think if I ever the time, I might try
                    >> to produce what I think a modern British Romancelang
                    >> would be like;
                    >
                    > If you ever do find the time, I'll read the results with
                    > great interest.

                    Thank you.

                    > My first guess, made from a position of near-ignorance on
                    > my part, is that it would be rather like northern French.
                    > If that guess is along the right lines, then a further
                    > question would be in what ways it might be expected to
                    > differ from northern French.

                    Certainly the way Vulgar Latin developed in northern Gaul
                    would probably not be so different. My main criticism of
                    Brithenig is that it does not IMO make sufficient allowance
                    for influence from sister Romancelangs. The various
                    Romancelangs of western Europe were always in contact and
                    exercising some influence on one another. It's all very
                    well having the Vulgar Latin of Dacia developing in
                    isolation, but I don't think having the Vulgar Latin of
                    Britain behaving similarly is likely.

                    As for differences between a British Romance & norther
                    Francien? Probably front rounded vowels would not have
                    maintained themselves. The continental [ø] and [œ] had
                    already given way to unrounded sounds in Old English, and
                    the same happened later with Anglo-Norman borrowings, cf.
                    bœef ~ beef. The Old English [y] eventually became
                    unrounded, tho later the Anglo-Norman [y] became [iw].

                    Old French had a rich set of diphthongs and a few
                    triphthongs besides; later these all gave way to the
                    monophthongs of modern French. I see no reason to suppose
                    that a British romance would have behaved the same way.

                    Old northern French also had the phones [θ] and [ð]; they
                    are now lost in modern French. But as both Welsh & English
                    retain them (including in Anglo-Norman borrowing such as
                    _faith_), it is surely like that a British Romance would
                    have retained these phones also.

                    So, yes, one must IMO have regard to how Vulgar Latin
                    developed in northern France, but I'm sure a British
                    Romancelang would be quite distinctive from modern French,
                    just as french is distinctive from neighboring Italian,
                    Catalan or Spanish.
                    =============================================================

                    On 19/02/2013 05:16, James Kane wrote:
                    > I have done a Vulgar Latin descended from proto-Germanic
                    > which isn't too bad because the cases and tenses of
                    > proto-Germanic collapse nicely,

                    Yep - and don't forget that Vulgar Latin had two cases,
                    which were preserved in Old French and in Old Provençal.
                    (Thinks: Would "Old Britannic" have preserved them?)

                    > but there was a bit of tempering of the phonology.

                    Yes - there usually has to be some fudging here because
                    other languages rarely have the same phonetic inventory as
                    Vulgar Latin.

                    > Obviously altlangs are much more interesting to do but
                    > bogolangs are good for beginners who wish to explore
                    > diachronic sound changes without as much effort.

                    Indeed - quite a good exercise for beginners and IMO more
                    worthwhile than the "relex of English" which is often done.

                    I guess my first conlang - whose details are now long
                    forgotten - when I was about 10 or 11 was a bogolang.
                    Essentially IIRC the root words were Old English gleaned from
                    an etymological dictionary I had come across, and the
                    morphology was based on French I found in text books
                    belonging to my mother. But in bogolang, all those verb
                    endings were still pronounced :)

                    --
                    Ray
                    ==================================
                    http://www.carolandray.plus.com
                    ==================================
                    "language … began with half-musical unanalysed expressions
                    for individual beings and events."
                    [Otto Jespersen, Progress in Language, 1895]
                  • R A Brown
                    On 19/02/2013 08:19, R A Brown wrote: [snip] ... Um - on second thoughts - no, not a bogolang. There was no application of French sound changes to a Saxon
                    Message 9 of 28 , Feb 19, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On 19/02/2013 08:19, R A Brown wrote:
                      [snip]
                      > I guess my first conlang - whose details are now long
                      > forgotten - when I was about 10 or 11 was a bogolang.
                      > Essentially IIRC the root words were Old English gleaned
                      > from an etymological dictionary I had come across, and
                      > the morphology was based on French I found in text books
                      > belonging to my mother. But in bogolang, all those verb
                      > endings were still pronounced :)

                      Um - on second thoughts - no, not a bogolang. There was no
                      application of French sound changes to a Saxon lexicon (I
                      had no knowledge of the interesting history of French sound
                      changes at that tender age). It was, i suppose, more a
                      weird sort of creole ;)

                      --
                      Ray
                      ==================================
                      http://www.carolandray.plus.com
                      ==================================
                      "language … began with half-musical unanalysed expressions
                      for individual beings and events."
                      [Otto Jespersen, Progress in Language, 1895]
                    • Jörg Rhiemeier
                      Hallo conlangers! ... Good. ... Indeed not. French, for instance, does not have the kind of umlaut process German has - it arrived at its front rounded vowels
                      Message 10 of 28 , Feb 19, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hallo conlangers!

                        On Tuesday 19 February 2013 09:19:46 R A Brown wrote:

                        > On 18/02/2013 20:43, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
                        > > Hallo conlangers!
                        >
                        > > On Monday 18 February 2013 14:58:54 R A Brown wrote:
                        > [...]
                        >
                        > >> My understanding is that Brithenig did start out as an
                        > >> altlang: What would modern British Romance be like if
                        > >> spoken Latin had survived the withdrawal of the
                        > >> legions? But IMO it did lean too far in the bogolang
                        > >> direction. It certainly gives that appearance.
                        > >
                        > > Yes. Brithenig is not really a bogolang, but it gets
                        > > close, and is guilty of treading loose a wave of
                        > > bogolangs.
                        >
                        > I agree on both points.

                        Good.

                        > [snip]
                        >
                        > >> Indeed - and also whether it is a genuine altlang, i.e.
                        > >> the way a language might plausibly have developed if
                        > >> history had been different, or whether it is a
                        > >> bogolang, i.e. early Germanic with the sound changes of
                        > >> a Slavonic group.
                        > >
                        > > Yes. That is a difference. Of course, we cannot say
                        > > that a bogolang was *impossible* - it is just very
                        > > unlikely,
                        >
                        > I cannot think of any actual examples among natlangs. The
                        > Slav influence on Romanian is obvious, and French acquired
                        > the front rounded vowels of neighboring Germanic, but
                        > neither are bogolangs.

                        Indeed not. French, for instance, does not have the kind of umlaut
                        process German has - it arrived at its front rounded vowels in a
                        completely different way.

                        Another example are the various regional dialects of diaspora
                        languages such as Yiddish or Romani. They never are bogolangs;
                        they simply did not ape the sound changes of the relevant host
                        country's language.

                        > Creole are often cited as taking one
                        > language and applying the phonology of another, but the
                        > results certainly do not resemble bogolangs.

                        That characterization of creoles indeed flies only so far, and
                        creoles do not resemble bogolangs in any meaningful way.

                        > ============================================================
                        >
                        > On 18/02/2013 20:58, And Rosta wrote:
                        > [British Romance]
                        > > My first guess, made from a position of near-ignorance on
                        > > my part, is that it would be rather like northern French.
                        > > If that guess is along the right lines, then a further
                        > > question would be in what ways it might be expected to
                        > > differ from northern French.
                        >
                        > Certainly the way Vulgar Latin developed in northern Gaul
                        > would probably not be so different. My main criticism of
                        > Brithenig is that it does not IMO make sufficient allowance
                        > for influence from sister Romancelangs.

                        And I concur with this criticism.

                        > The various
                        > Romancelangs of western Europe were always in contact and
                        > exercising some influence on one another. It's all very
                        > well having the Vulgar Latin of Dacia developing in
                        > isolation, but I don't think having the Vulgar Latin of
                        > Britain behaving similarly is likely.

                        Yes. This is a great difference between British Celtic and a
                        hypothetical British Romance. British Celtic had no dialect
                        continuum on the continent to connect with after about 400 AD,
                        as Continental Celtic was extinct. British Romance would
                        interact with Gallo-Romance, as the sea connects as much as it
                        separates. It would be part of the Western Romance dialect
                        continuum.

                        > As for differences between a British Romance & norther
                        > Francien? Probably front rounded vowels would not have
                        > maintained themselves. The continental [ø] and [œ] had
                        > already given way to unrounded sounds in Old English, and
                        > the same happened later with Anglo-Norman borrowings, cf.
                        > bœef ~ beef. The Old English [y] eventually became
                        > unrounded, tho later the Anglo-Norman [y] became [iw].

                        Front rounded vowels also disappeared in Welsh; whether they
                        were preserved in Cornish is AFAIK a contentious matter among
                        Cornish revivalists. Breton, at any rate, has them.

                        So yes, a loss of front rounded vowels in British Romance is
                        not unlikely.

                        > Old French had a rich set of diphthongs and a few
                        > triphthongs besides; later these all gave way to the
                        > monophthongs of modern French. I see no reason to suppose
                        > that a British romance would have behaved the same way.

                        I see no such reason, either. British Romance may have a rich
                        inventory of diphthongs and triphthongs.

                        > Old northern French also had the phones [θ] and [ð]; they
                        > are now lost in modern French. But as both Welsh & English
                        > retain them (including in Anglo-Norman borrowing such as
                        > _faith_), it is surely like that a British Romance would
                        > have retained these phones also.

                        Quite likely, I think.

                        > So, yes, one must IMO have regard to how Vulgar Latin
                        > developed in northern France, but I'm sure a British
                        > Romancelang would be quite distinctive from modern French,
                        > just as french is distinctive from neighboring Italian,
                        > Catalan or Spanish.

                        Sure.

                        And as for the initial mutations of Brithenig, it is far from
                        certain that a British Romance language would have them. After
                        all, English doesn't. This of course raises the question *when*
                        these mutations arose in the Insular Celtic languages. Most
                        Celticists AFAIK assume that they happened between 400 and 800
                        AD (and Continental Celtic languages never developed them, Dan
                        Jones's Arvorec notwithstanding), but the name _Britannia_ seems
                        to have a mutated initial (otherwise it would be _**Pritannia_,
                        cf. Welsh _Prydein_) - but the /t/ in it shows that intervocalic
                        lenition had not happened yet in British Celtic of 2000 years ago.

                        > =============================================================
                        >
                        > On 19/02/2013 05:16, James Kane wrote:
                        > > I have done a Vulgar Latin descended from proto-Germanic
                        > > which isn't too bad because the cases and tenses of
                        > > proto-Germanic collapse nicely,
                        >
                        > Yep - and don't forget that Vulgar Latin had two cases,
                        > which were preserved in Old French and in Old Provençal.
                        > (Thinks: Would "Old Britannic" have preserved them?)

                        Perhaps; perhaps not. But eventually, they would have been lost.

                        > > but there was a bit of tempering of the phonology.
                        >
                        > Yes - there usually has to be some fudging here because
                        > other languages rarely have the same phonetic inventory as
                        > Vulgar Latin.

                        Amen! I had to fudge the sound changes, especially the vowel
                        changes, *a lot* when I was doing Roman Germanech because
                        Common West Germanic is quite far away from Vulgar Latin in terms
                        of phonology!

                        > > Obviously altlangs are much more interesting to do but
                        > > bogolangs are good for beginners who wish to explore
                        > > diachronic sound changes without as much effort.
                        >
                        > Indeed - quite a good exercise for beginners and IMO more
                        > worthwhile than the "relex of English" which is often done.

                        Sure.

                        --
                        ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                        http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
                        "Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1
                      • James Kane
                        Romanian is almost a real life altlang and IMO quite a cool language. It doesn t have an identical phonology to the surrounding Balkan or Slavic languages, nor
                        Message 11 of 28 , Feb 19, 2013
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Romanian is almost a real life altlang and IMO quite a cool language. It doesn't have an identical phonology to the surrounding Balkan or Slavic languages, nor did it go through the same sound changes but it is obviously influenced by them and different enough from the other Romance languages (while still obviously Romance) without resembling greatly any other language.



                          On 20/02/2013, at 5:11 AM, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...> wrote:

                          > Hallo conlangers!
                          >
                          > On Tuesday 19 February 2013 09:19:46 R A Brown wrote:
                          >
                          >> On 18/02/2013 20:43, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
                          >>> Hallo conlangers!
                          >>
                          >>> On Monday 18 February 2013 14:58:54 R A Brown wrote:
                          >> [...]
                          >>
                          >>>> My understanding is that Brithenig did start out as an
                          >>>> altlang: What would modern British Romance be like if
                          >>>> spoken Latin had survived the withdrawal of the
                          >>>> legions? But IMO it did lean too far in the bogolang
                          >>>> direction. It certainly gives that appearance.
                          >>>
                          >>> Yes. Brithenig is not really a bogolang, but it gets
                          >>> close, and is guilty of treading loose a wave of
                          >>> bogolangs.
                          >>
                          >> I agree on both points.
                          >
                          > Good.
                          >
                          >> [snip]
                          >>
                          >>>> Indeed - and also whether it is a genuine altlang, i.e.
                          >>>> the way a language might plausibly have developed if
                          >>>> history had been different, or whether it is a
                          >>>> bogolang, i.e. early Germanic with the sound changes of
                          >>>> a Slavonic group.
                          >>>
                          >>> Yes. That is a difference. Of course, we cannot say
                          >>> that a bogolang was *impossible* - it is just very
                          >>> unlikely,
                          >>
                          >> I cannot think of any actual examples among natlangs. The
                          >> Slav influence on Romanian is obvious, and French acquired
                          >> the front rounded vowels of neighboring Germanic, but
                          >> neither are bogolangs.
                          >
                          > Indeed not. French, for instance, does not have the kind of umlaut
                          > process German has - it arrived at its front rounded vowels in a
                          > completely different way.
                          >
                          > Another example are the various regional dialects of diaspora
                          > languages such as Yiddish or Romani. They never are bogolangs;
                          > they simply did not ape the sound changes of the relevant host
                          > country's language.
                          >
                          >> Creole are often cited as taking one
                          >> language and applying the phonology of another, but the
                          >> results certainly do not resemble bogolangs.
                          >
                          > That characterization of creoles indeed flies only so far, and
                          > creoles do not resemble bogolangs in any meaningful way.
                          >
                          >> ============================================================
                          >>
                          >> On 18/02/2013 20:58, And Rosta wrote:
                          >> [British Romance]
                          >>> My first guess, made from a position of near-ignorance on
                          >>> my part, is that it would be rather like northern French.
                          >>> If that guess is along the right lines, then a further
                          >>> question would be in what ways it might be expected to
                          >>> differ from northern French.
                          >>
                          >> Certainly the way Vulgar Latin developed in northern Gaul
                          >> would probably not be so different. My main criticism of
                          >> Brithenig is that it does not IMO make sufficient allowance
                          >> for influence from sister Romancelangs.
                          >
                          > And I concur with this criticism.
                          >
                          >> The various
                          >> Romancelangs of western Europe were always in contact and
                          >> exercising some influence on one another. It's all very
                          >> well having the Vulgar Latin of Dacia developing in
                          >> isolation, but I don't think having the Vulgar Latin of
                          >> Britain behaving similarly is likely.
                          >
                          > Yes. This is a great difference between British Celtic and a
                          > hypothetical British Romance. British Celtic had no dialect
                          > continuum on the continent to connect with after about 400 AD,
                          > as Continental Celtic was extinct. British Romance would
                          > interact with Gallo-Romance, as the sea connects as much as it
                          > separates. It would be part of the Western Romance dialect
                          > continuum.
                          >
                          >> As for differences between a British Romance & norther
                          >> Francien? Probably front rounded vowels would not have
                          >> maintained themselves. The continental [ø] and [œ] had
                          >> already given way to unrounded sounds in Old English, and
                          >> the same happened later with Anglo-Norman borrowings, cf.
                          >> bœef ~ beef. The Old English [y] eventually became
                          >> unrounded, tho later the Anglo-Norman [y] became [iw].
                          >
                          > Front rounded vowels also disappeared in Welsh; whether they
                          > were preserved in Cornish is AFAIK a contentious matter among
                          > Cornish revivalists. Breton, at any rate, has them.
                          >
                          > So yes, a loss of front rounded vowels in British Romance is
                          > not unlikely.
                          >
                          >> Old French had a rich set of diphthongs and a few
                          >> triphthongs besides; later these all gave way to the
                          >> monophthongs of modern French. I see no reason to suppose
                          >> that a British romance would have behaved the same way.
                          >
                          > I see no such reason, either. British Romance may have a rich
                          > inventory of diphthongs and triphthongs.
                          >
                          >> Old northern French also had the phones [θ] and [ð]; they
                          >> are now lost in modern French. But as both Welsh & English
                          >> retain them (including in Anglo-Norman borrowing such as
                          >> _faith_), it is surely like that a British Romance would
                          >> have retained these phones also.
                          >
                          > Quite likely, I think.
                          >
                          >> So, yes, one must IMO have regard to how Vulgar Latin
                          >> developed in northern France, but I'm sure a British
                          >> Romancelang would be quite distinctive from modern French,
                          >> just as french is distinctive from neighboring Italian,
                          >> Catalan or Spanish.
                          >
                          > Sure.
                          >
                          > And as for the initial mutations of Brithenig, it is far from
                          > certain that a British Romance language would have them. After
                          > all, English doesn't. This of course raises the question *when*
                          > these mutations arose in the Insular Celtic languages. Most
                          > Celticists AFAIK assume that they happened between 400 and 800
                          > AD (and Continental Celtic languages never developed them, Dan
                          > Jones's Arvorec notwithstanding), but the name _Britannia_ seems
                          > to have a mutated initial (otherwise it would be _**Pritannia_,
                          > cf. Welsh _Prydein_) - but the /t/ in it shows that intervocalic
                          > lenition had not happened yet in British Celtic of 2000 years ago.
                          >
                          >> =============================================================
                          >>
                          >> On 19/02/2013 05:16, James Kane wrote:
                          >>> I have done a Vulgar Latin descended from proto-Germanic
                          >>> which isn't too bad because the cases and tenses of
                          >>> proto-Germanic collapse nicely,
                          >>
                          >> Yep - and don't forget that Vulgar Latin had two cases,
                          >> which were preserved in Old French and in Old Provençal.
                          >> (Thinks: Would "Old Britannic" have preserved them?)
                          >
                          > Perhaps; perhaps not. But eventually, they would have been lost.
                          >
                          >>> but there was a bit of tempering of the phonology.
                          >>
                          >> Yes - there usually has to be some fudging here because
                          >> other languages rarely have the same phonetic inventory as
                          >> Vulgar Latin.
                          >
                          > Amen! I had to fudge the sound changes, especially the vowel
                          > changes, *a lot* when I was doing Roman Germanech because
                          > Common West Germanic is quite far away from Vulgar Latin in terms
                          > of phonology!
                          >
                          >>> Obviously altlangs are much more interesting to do but
                          >>> bogolangs are good for beginners who wish to explore
                          >>> diachronic sound changes without as much effort.
                          >>
                          >> Indeed - quite a good exercise for beginners and IMO more
                          >> worthwhile than the "relex of English" which is often done.
                          >
                          > Sure.
                          >
                          > --
                          > ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                          > http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
                          > "Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1
                        • Hugo Cesar de Castro Carneiro
                          I see people creating altlangs/bogolangs between (somewhat) closely related families. Usually Indo-european ones. Does anyone here know of an alt/bogolang
                          Message 12 of 28 , Feb 19, 2013
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I see people creating altlangs/bogolangs between (somewhat) closely related
                            families. Usually Indo-european ones.

                            Does anyone here know of an alt/bogolang based on non-related families, or
                            maybe somewhat related families if you consider the controversial
                            macro-families of Nostratic or Dené-Caucasian? Something like a Uralic
                            language that looks like Indo-European? Or an Indo-European language that
                            looks like Eskimo-Aleut?

                            Furthermore, has anyone seen an alt/bogolang based on completely
                            non-related families, like a Mapudungun language that looks like Bantu or
                            Khoisan?


                            On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:13 PM, James Kane <kanejam@...> wrote:

                            > Romanian is almost a real life altlang and IMO quite a cool language. It
                            > doesn't have an identical phonology to the surrounding Balkan or Slavic
                            > languages, nor did it go through the same sound changes but it is obviously
                            > influenced by them and different enough from the other Romance languages
                            > (while still obviously Romance) without resembling greatly any other
                            > language.
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > On 20/02/2013, at 5:11 AM, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > > Hallo conlangers!
                            > >
                            > > On Tuesday 19 February 2013 09:19:46 R A Brown wrote:
                            > >
                            > >> On 18/02/2013 20:43, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
                            > >>> Hallo conlangers!
                            > >>
                            > >>> On Monday 18 February 2013 14:58:54 R A Brown wrote:
                            > >> [...]
                            > >>
                            > >>>> My understanding is that Brithenig did start out as an
                            > >>>> altlang: What would modern British Romance be like if
                            > >>>> spoken Latin had survived the withdrawal of the
                            > >>>> legions? But IMO it did lean too far in the bogolang
                            > >>>> direction. It certainly gives that appearance.
                            > >>>
                            > >>> Yes. Brithenig is not really a bogolang, but it gets
                            > >>> close, and is guilty of treading loose a wave of
                            > >>> bogolangs.
                            > >>
                            > >> I agree on both points.
                            > >
                            > > Good.
                            > >
                            > >> [snip]
                            > >>
                            > >>>> Indeed - and also whether it is a genuine altlang, i.e.
                            > >>>> the way a language might plausibly have developed if
                            > >>>> history had been different, or whether it is a
                            > >>>> bogolang, i.e. early Germanic with the sound changes of
                            > >>>> a Slavonic group.
                            > >>>
                            > >>> Yes. That is a difference. Of course, we cannot say
                            > >>> that a bogolang was *impossible* - it is just very
                            > >>> unlikely,
                            > >>
                            > >> I cannot think of any actual examples among natlangs. The
                            > >> Slav influence on Romanian is obvious, and French acquired
                            > >> the front rounded vowels of neighboring Germanic, but
                            > >> neither are bogolangs.
                            > >
                            > > Indeed not. French, for instance, does not have the kind of umlaut
                            > > process German has - it arrived at its front rounded vowels in a
                            > > completely different way.
                            > >
                            > > Another example are the various regional dialects of diaspora
                            > > languages such as Yiddish or Romani. They never are bogolangs;
                            > > they simply did not ape the sound changes of the relevant host
                            > > country's language.
                            > >
                            > >> Creole are often cited as taking one
                            > >> language and applying the phonology of another, but the
                            > >> results certainly do not resemble bogolangs.
                            > >
                            > > That characterization of creoles indeed flies only so far, and
                            > > creoles do not resemble bogolangs in any meaningful way.
                            > >
                            > >> ============================================================
                            > >>
                            > >> On 18/02/2013 20:58, And Rosta wrote:
                            > >> [British Romance]
                            > >>> My first guess, made from a position of near-ignorance on
                            > >>> my part, is that it would be rather like northern French.
                            > >>> If that guess is along the right lines, then a further
                            > >>> question would be in what ways it might be expected to
                            > >>> differ from northern French.
                            > >>
                            > >> Certainly the way Vulgar Latin developed in northern Gaul
                            > >> would probably not be so different. My main criticism of
                            > >> Brithenig is that it does not IMO make sufficient allowance
                            > >> for influence from sister Romancelangs.
                            > >
                            > > And I concur with this criticism.
                            > >
                            > >> The various
                            > >> Romancelangs of western Europe were always in contact and
                            > >> exercising some influence on one another. It's all very
                            > >> well having the Vulgar Latin of Dacia developing in
                            > >> isolation, but I don't think having the Vulgar Latin of
                            > >> Britain behaving similarly is likely.
                            > >
                            > > Yes. This is a great difference between British Celtic and a
                            > > hypothetical British Romance. British Celtic had no dialect
                            > > continuum on the continent to connect with after about 400 AD,
                            > > as Continental Celtic was extinct. British Romance would
                            > > interact with Gallo-Romance, as the sea connects as much as it
                            > > separates. It would be part of the Western Romance dialect
                            > > continuum.
                            > >
                            > >> As for differences between a British Romance & norther
                            > >> Francien? Probably front rounded vowels would not have
                            > >> maintained themselves. The continental [ø] and [œ] had
                            > >> already given way to unrounded sounds in Old English, and
                            > >> the same happened later with Anglo-Norman borrowings, cf.
                            > >> bœef ~ beef. The Old English [y] eventually became
                            > >> unrounded, tho later the Anglo-Norman [y] became [iw].
                            > >
                            > > Front rounded vowels also disappeared in Welsh; whether they
                            > > were preserved in Cornish is AFAIK a contentious matter among
                            > > Cornish revivalists. Breton, at any rate, has them.
                            > >
                            > > So yes, a loss of front rounded vowels in British Romance is
                            > > not unlikely.
                            > >
                            > >> Old French had a rich set of diphthongs and a few
                            > >> triphthongs besides; later these all gave way to the
                            > >> monophthongs of modern French. I see no reason to suppose
                            > >> that a British romance would have behaved the same way.
                            > >
                            > > I see no such reason, either. British Romance may have a rich
                            > > inventory of diphthongs and triphthongs.
                            > >
                            > >> Old northern French also had the phones [θ] and [ð]; they
                            > >> are now lost in modern French. But as both Welsh & English
                            > >> retain them (including in Anglo-Norman borrowing such as
                            > >> _faith_), it is surely like that a British Romance would
                            > >> have retained these phones also.
                            > >
                            > > Quite likely, I think.
                            > >
                            > >> So, yes, one must IMO have regard to how Vulgar Latin
                            > >> developed in northern France, but I'm sure a British
                            > >> Romancelang would be quite distinctive from modern French,
                            > >> just as french is distinctive from neighboring Italian,
                            > >> Catalan or Spanish.
                            > >
                            > > Sure.
                            > >
                            > > And as for the initial mutations of Brithenig, it is far from
                            > > certain that a British Romance language would have them. After
                            > > all, English doesn't. This of course raises the question *when*
                            > > these mutations arose in the Insular Celtic languages. Most
                            > > Celticists AFAIK assume that they happened between 400 and 800
                            > > AD (and Continental Celtic languages never developed them, Dan
                            > > Jones's Arvorec notwithstanding), but the name _Britannia_ seems
                            > > to have a mutated initial (otherwise it would be _**Pritannia_,
                            > > cf. Welsh _Prydein_) - but the /t/ in it shows that intervocalic
                            > > lenition had not happened yet in British Celtic of 2000 years ago.
                            > >
                            > >> =============================================================
                            > >>
                            > >> On 19/02/2013 05:16, James Kane wrote:
                            > >>> I have done a Vulgar Latin descended from proto-Germanic
                            > >>> which isn't too bad because the cases and tenses of
                            > >>> proto-Germanic collapse nicely,
                            > >>
                            > >> Yep - and don't forget that Vulgar Latin had two cases,
                            > >> which were preserved in Old French and in Old Provençal.
                            > >> (Thinks: Would "Old Britannic" have preserved them?)
                            > >
                            > > Perhaps; perhaps not. But eventually, they would have been lost.
                            > >
                            > >>> but there was a bit of tempering of the phonology.
                            > >>
                            > >> Yes - there usually has to be some fudging here because
                            > >> other languages rarely have the same phonetic inventory as
                            > >> Vulgar Latin.
                            > >
                            > > Amen! I had to fudge the sound changes, especially the vowel
                            > > changes, *a lot* when I was doing Roman Germanech because
                            > > Common West Germanic is quite far away from Vulgar Latin in terms
                            > > of phonology!
                            > >
                            > >>> Obviously altlangs are much more interesting to do but
                            > >>> bogolangs are good for beginners who wish to explore
                            > >>> diachronic sound changes without as much effort.
                            > >>
                            > >> Indeed - quite a good exercise for beginners and IMO more
                            > >> worthwhile than the "relex of English" which is often done.
                            > >
                            > > Sure.
                            > >
                            > > --
                            > > ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                            > > http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
                            > > "Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1
                            >
                          • Adam Walker
                            Years back someone was working on a Vulgar Latin with Chinese sound changes bogolang, IIRC. Adam
                            Message 13 of 28 , Feb 19, 2013
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Years back someone was working on a Vulgar Latin with Chinese sound
                              changes bogolang, IIRC.

                              Adam

                              On 2/19/13, Hugo Cesar de Castro Carneiro <hcesarcastro@...> wrote:
                              > I see people creating altlangs/bogolangs between (somewhat) closely related
                              > families. Usually Indo-european ones.
                              >
                              > Does anyone here know of an alt/bogolang based on non-related families, or
                              > maybe somewhat related families if you consider the controversial
                              > macro-families of Nostratic or Dené-Caucasian? Something like a Uralic
                              > language that looks like Indo-European? Or an Indo-European language that
                              > looks like Eskimo-Aleut?
                              >
                              > Furthermore, has anyone seen an alt/bogolang based on completely
                              > non-related families, like a Mapudungun language that looks like Bantu or
                              > Khoisan?
                              >
                              >
                              > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:13 PM, James Kane <kanejam@...> wrote:
                              >
                              >> Romanian is almost a real life altlang and IMO quite a cool language. It
                              >> doesn't have an identical phonology to the surrounding Balkan or Slavic
                              >> languages, nor did it go through the same sound changes but it is
                              >> obviously
                              >> influenced by them and different enough from the other Romance languages
                              >> (while still obviously Romance) without resembling greatly any other
                              >> language.
                              >>
                              >>
                              >>
                              >> On 20/02/2013, at 5:11 AM, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...> wrote:
                              >>
                              >> > Hallo conlangers!
                              >> >
                              >> > On Tuesday 19 February 2013 09:19:46 R A Brown wrote:
                              >> >
                              >> >> On 18/02/2013 20:43, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
                              >> >>> Hallo conlangers!
                              >> >>
                              >> >>> On Monday 18 February 2013 14:58:54 R A Brown wrote:
                              >> >> [...]
                              >> >>
                              >> >>>> My understanding is that Brithenig did start out as an
                              >> >>>> altlang: What would modern British Romance be like if
                              >> >>>> spoken Latin had survived the withdrawal of the
                              >> >>>> legions? But IMO it did lean too far in the bogolang
                              >> >>>> direction. It certainly gives that appearance.
                              >> >>>
                              >> >>> Yes. Brithenig is not really a bogolang, but it gets
                              >> >>> close, and is guilty of treading loose a wave of
                              >> >>> bogolangs.
                              >> >>
                              >> >> I agree on both points.
                              >> >
                              >> > Good.
                              >> >
                              >> >> [snip]
                              >> >>
                              >> >>>> Indeed - and also whether it is a genuine altlang, i.e.
                              >> >>>> the way a language might plausibly have developed if
                              >> >>>> history had been different, or whether it is a
                              >> >>>> bogolang, i.e. early Germanic with the sound changes of
                              >> >>>> a Slavonic group.
                              >> >>>
                              >> >>> Yes. That is a difference. Of course, we cannot say
                              >> >>> that a bogolang was *impossible* - it is just very
                              >> >>> unlikely,
                              >> >>
                              >> >> I cannot think of any actual examples among natlangs. The
                              >> >> Slav influence on Romanian is obvious, and French acquired
                              >> >> the front rounded vowels of neighboring Germanic, but
                              >> >> neither are bogolangs.
                              >> >
                              >> > Indeed not. French, for instance, does not have the kind of umlaut
                              >> > process German has - it arrived at its front rounded vowels in a
                              >> > completely different way.
                              >> >
                              >> > Another example are the various regional dialects of diaspora
                              >> > languages such as Yiddish or Romani. They never are bogolangs;
                              >> > they simply did not ape the sound changes of the relevant host
                              >> > country's language.
                              >> >
                              >> >> Creole are often cited as taking one
                              >> >> language and applying the phonology of another, but the
                              >> >> results certainly do not resemble bogolangs.
                              >> >
                              >> > That characterization of creoles indeed flies only so far, and
                              >> > creoles do not resemble bogolangs in any meaningful way.
                              >> >
                              >> >> ============================================================
                              >> >>
                              >> >> On 18/02/2013 20:58, And Rosta wrote:
                              >> >> [British Romance]
                              >> >>> My first guess, made from a position of near-ignorance on
                              >> >>> my part, is that it would be rather like northern French.
                              >> >>> If that guess is along the right lines, then a further
                              >> >>> question would be in what ways it might be expected to
                              >> >>> differ from northern French.
                              >> >>
                              >> >> Certainly the way Vulgar Latin developed in northern Gaul
                              >> >> would probably not be so different. My main criticism of
                              >> >> Brithenig is that it does not IMO make sufficient allowance
                              >> >> for influence from sister Romancelangs.
                              >> >
                              >> > And I concur with this criticism.
                              >> >
                              >> >> The various
                              >> >> Romancelangs of western Europe were always in contact and
                              >> >> exercising some influence on one another. It's all very
                              >> >> well having the Vulgar Latin of Dacia developing in
                              >> >> isolation, but I don't think having the Vulgar Latin of
                              >> >> Britain behaving similarly is likely.
                              >> >
                              >> > Yes. This is a great difference between British Celtic and a
                              >> > hypothetical British Romance. British Celtic had no dialect
                              >> > continuum on the continent to connect with after about 400 AD,
                              >> > as Continental Celtic was extinct. British Romance would
                              >> > interact with Gallo-Romance, as the sea connects as much as it
                              >> > separates. It would be part of the Western Romance dialect
                              >> > continuum.
                              >> >
                              >> >> As for differences between a British Romance & norther
                              >> >> Francien? Probably front rounded vowels would not have
                              >> >> maintained themselves. The continental [ø] and [œ] had
                              >> >> already given way to unrounded sounds in Old English, and
                              >> >> the same happened later with Anglo-Norman borrowings, cf.
                              >> >> bœef ~ beef. The Old English [y] eventually became
                              >> >> unrounded, tho later the Anglo-Norman [y] became [iw].
                              >> >
                              >> > Front rounded vowels also disappeared in Welsh; whether they
                              >> > were preserved in Cornish is AFAIK a contentious matter among
                              >> > Cornish revivalists. Breton, at any rate, has them.
                              >> >
                              >> > So yes, a loss of front rounded vowels in British Romance is
                              >> > not unlikely.
                              >> >
                              >> >> Old French had a rich set of diphthongs and a few
                              >> >> triphthongs besides; later these all gave way to the
                              >> >> monophthongs of modern French. I see no reason to suppose
                              >> >> that a British romance would have behaved the same way.
                              >> >
                              >> > I see no such reason, either. British Romance may have a rich
                              >> > inventory of diphthongs and triphthongs.
                              >> >
                              >> >> Old northern French also had the phones [θ] and [ð]; they
                              >> >> are now lost in modern French. But as both Welsh & English
                              >> >> retain them (including in Anglo-Norman borrowing such as
                              >> >> _faith_), it is surely like that a British Romance would
                              >> >> have retained these phones also.
                              >> >
                              >> > Quite likely, I think.
                              >> >
                              >> >> So, yes, one must IMO have regard to how Vulgar Latin
                              >> >> developed in northern France, but I'm sure a British
                              >> >> Romancelang would be quite distinctive from modern French,
                              >> >> just as french is distinctive from neighboring Italian,
                              >> >> Catalan or Spanish.
                              >> >
                              >> > Sure.
                              >> >
                              >> > And as for the initial mutations of Brithenig, it is far from
                              >> > certain that a British Romance language would have them. After
                              >> > all, English doesn't. This of course raises the question *when*
                              >> > these mutations arose in the Insular Celtic languages. Most
                              >> > Celticists AFAIK assume that they happened between 400 and 800
                              >> > AD (and Continental Celtic languages never developed them, Dan
                              >> > Jones's Arvorec notwithstanding), but the name _Britannia_ seems
                              >> > to have a mutated initial (otherwise it would be _**Pritannia_,
                              >> > cf. Welsh _Prydein_) - but the /t/ in it shows that intervocalic
                              >> > lenition had not happened yet in British Celtic of 2000 years ago.
                              >> >
                              >> >> =============================================================
                              >> >>
                              >> >> On 19/02/2013 05:16, James Kane wrote:
                              >> >>> I have done a Vulgar Latin descended from proto-Germanic
                              >> >>> which isn't too bad because the cases and tenses of
                              >> >>> proto-Germanic collapse nicely,
                              >> >>
                              >> >> Yep - and don't forget that Vulgar Latin had two cases,
                              >> >> which were preserved in Old French and in Old Provençal.
                              >> >> (Thinks: Would "Old Britannic" have preserved them?)
                              >> >
                              >> > Perhaps; perhaps not. But eventually, they would have been lost.
                              >> >
                              >> >>> but there was a bit of tempering of the phonology.
                              >> >>
                              >> >> Yes - there usually has to be some fudging here because
                              >> >> other languages rarely have the same phonetic inventory as
                              >> >> Vulgar Latin.
                              >> >
                              >> > Amen! I had to fudge the sound changes, especially the vowel
                              >> > changes, *a lot* when I was doing Roman Germanech because
                              >> > Common West Germanic is quite far away from Vulgar Latin in terms
                              >> > of phonology!
                              >> >
                              >> >>> Obviously altlangs are much more interesting to do but
                              >> >>> bogolangs are good for beginners who wish to explore
                              >> >>> diachronic sound changes without as much effort.
                              >> >>
                              >> >> Indeed - quite a good exercise for beginners and IMO more
                              >> >> worthwhile than the "relex of English" which is often done.
                              >> >
                              >> > Sure.
                              >> >
                              >> > --
                              >> > ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                              >> > http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
                              >> > "Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1
                              >>
                              >
                            • R A Brown
                              ... [snip] ... Yes, it did. Tho it alone of the Romancelangs has them and the proximity and, indeed, in some places, intermingling with Germanic speakers
                              Message 14 of 28 , Feb 19, 2013
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On 19/02/2013 16:11, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
                                > Hallo conlangers!
                                >
                                > On Tuesday 19 February 2013 09:19:46 R A Brown wrote:
                                >
                                [snip]
                                >>
                                >> I cannot think of any actual examples [of bogolangs]
                                >> among natlangs. The Slav influence on Romanian is
                                >> obvious, and French acquired the front rounded vowels
                                >> of neighboring Germanic, but neither are bogolangs.
                                >
                                > Indeed not. French, for instance, does not have the
                                > kind of umlaut process German has - it arrived at its
                                > front rounded vowels in a completely different way.

                                Yes, it did. Tho it alone of the Romancelangs has them and
                                the proximity and, indeed, in some places, intermingling
                                with Germanic speakers probably helped to maintain them.

                                [snip]

                                >> The various Romancelangs of western Europe were always
                                >> in contact and exercising some influence on one
                                >> another. It's all very well having the Vulgar Latin
                                >> of Dacia developing in isolation, but I don't think
                                >> having the Vulgar Latin of Britain behaving similarly
                                >> is likely.
                                >
                                > Yes. This is a great difference between British Celtic
                                > and a hypothetical British Romance. British Celtic had
                                > no dialect continuum on the continent to connect with
                                > after about 400 AD, as Continental Celtic was extinct.
                                > British Romance would interact with Gallo-Romance, as
                                > the sea connects as much as it separates. It would be
                                > part of the Western Romance dialect continuum.

                                Yes, I think it would have to be. What is often forgotten
                                is that before the establishment of national standards and
                                universal education, the western Romance area was a
                                linguistic _continuum_ from Sicily to Picardy and through to
                                Seville and Lisbon. IIRC Andrew assumed that there would
                                have been a Saxon settlement in Britain, but on a lesser
                                scale than *here*, and that the Romance speakers would
                                thereby be separated from their continental brethren and
                                develop independently. But IMO that is not likely. Even if
                                they were separated by a Saxon speaking area, they would
                                still have been too close to be isolated from continental
                                Romance; they would not have been like the Romance speakers
                                in the Balkans.

                                >> As for differences between a British Romance & norther
                                >> Francien? Probably front rounded vowels would not
                                >> have maintained themselves. The continental [ø] and
                                >> [œ] had already given way to unrounded sounds in Old
                                >> English, and the same happened later with Anglo-Norman
                                >> borrowings, cf. bœef ~ beef. The Old English [y]
                                >> eventually became unrounded, tho later the
                                >> Anglo-Norman [y] became [iw].
                                >
                                > Front rounded vowels also disappeared in Welsh;

                                Yep - it is likely the Old British [u] moved forward to
                                rounded high central [ʉ] before becoming unrounded [ɨ] which
                                is maintained in the north Walian pronunciation till the
                                present day (in the south it has fronted still further to
                                become [i]). There was probably a rounded mid central vowel
                                before it became unrounded [ɘ] also.

                                > whether they were preserved in Cornish is AFAIK a
                                > contentious matter among Cornish revivalists. Breton, at
                                > any rate, has them.

                                Re-enforced by the French around it. Breton has also
                                developed some unique features through French influence; it
                                alone of the modern Celtic langs has an indefinite article,
                                and the perfect tense is not formed with the preposition for
                                "after" followed by the verbnoun, as in its sister langs,
                                but with "to be" + perfect participle for intransitive
                                verbs, and "to have" + perfect participle for transitive ones.

                                However, back to a putative British Romance - I think the
                                indications are that it would not have had the front rounded
                                vowels of northern France.

                                > So yes, a loss of front rounded vowels in British
                                > Romance is not unlikely.
                                >
                                >> Old French had a rich set of diphthongs and a few
                                >> triphthongs besides; later these all gave way to the
                                >> monophthongs of modern French. I see no reason to
                                >> suppose that a British romance would have behaved the
                                >> same way.
                                >
                                > I see no such reason, either. British Romance may have
                                > a rich inventory of diphthongs and triphthongs.

                                It may well have done. They Welsh are fond of diphthongs
                                and English doesn't exactly lack them, so I think the
                                preservation of them is likely.

                                [snip]
                                >
                                > And as for the initial mutations of Brithenig, it is far
                                > from certain that a British Romance language would have
                                > them. After all, English doesn't.

                                Yet it shares other areal features with Welsh. I've referred
                                in an earlier email to the preservation of [θ] and [ð] in
                                both languages (one could also add the preservation of [w]),
                                but more striking IMO is the development of periphrastic
                                tenses with "to be" to express progressive or continuous
                                action. Such things are, of course, not unknown in Italian
                                with "stare" plus the gerund, but I think this construction
                                would have become as common place in Brit-Romance as it is
                                in modern English.

                                > This of course raises the question *when* these mutations
                                > arose in the Insular Celtic languages. Most Celticists
                                > AFAIK assume that they happened between 400 and 800 AD
                                > (and Continental Celtic languages never developed them,
                                > Dan Jones's Arvorec notwithstanding),

                                :)

                                Yes, this is a features which is not areal since, as you
                                observe, English does not have it. Although they are an
                                interesting feature, I am doubtful that a Romance language
                                would actually have developed grammaticalized initial
                                consonant mutation.

                                > but the name _Britannia_ seems to have a mutated initial
                                > (otherwise it would be _**Pritannia_, cf. Welsh
                                > _Prydein_) - but the /t/ in it shows that intervocalic
                                > lenition had not happened yet in British Celtic of 2000
                                > years ago.

                                I don't think much can be made of this. The various Greek,
                                Latin & British/Welsh forms are derivatives of some
                                pre-Celtic and, almost certainly, pre-IE ethnicon - from Old
                                Albic? :)

                                We don't know what was going on in that unknown language.

                                [snip]
                                >> Yes - there usually has to be some fudging here because
                                >> other languages rarely have the same phonetic inventory
                                >> as Vulgar Latin.
                                >
                                > Amen! I had to fudge the sound changes, especially the
                                > vowel changes, *a lot* when I was doing Roman Germanech
                                > because Common West Germanic is quite far away from
                                > Vulgar Latin in terms of phonology!

                                Always a problem for bogolangers. :)
                                ========================================================
                                On 19/02/2013 18:13, James Kane wrote:
                                > Romanian is almost a real life altlang

                                Except for the small fact that it actually developed and
                                exists in this world!

                                An _altlang_ by definition 'exists' in an alternate timeline.

                                > and IMO quite a cool language. It doesn't have an
                                > identical phonology to the surrounding Balkan or Slavic
                                > languages, nor did it go through the same sound changes

                                Exactly - it ain't a living example of a bogolang.

                                > but it is obviously influenced by them and different
                                > enough from the other Romance languages (while still
                                > obviously Romance) without resembling greatly any other
                                > language.

                                There are resemblances to Romancelangs in the Balkan area
                                that have now died out, and it does show certain features
                                that make kinship with Italian fairly obvious.

                                One will notice that the Romansch dialects have similarly
                                been influenced by the high German dialects spoken in
                                contiguous areas, and the Moorish influence in Spanish is
                                noticeable.

                                I admit Romanian is interesting, but I don't think any more
                                or less remarkable than most other Romancelangs (personally
                                I find the Reto-romance and the Sardinian dialects more
                                interesting). I fail to understand how a living language
                                can be "almost a real life altlang."

                                --
                                Ray
                                ==================================
                                http://www.carolandray.plus.com
                                ==================================
                                "language … began with half-musical unanalysed expressions
                                for individual beings and events."
                                [Otto Jespersen, Progress in Language, 1895]
                              • Jörg Rhiemeier
                                Hallo conlangers! ... This is likely. BTW, I am pretty certain that Old High German already had [æ], [ø] and [y] even though they don t show up in writing -
                                Message 15 of 28 , Feb 19, 2013
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Hallo conlangers!

                                  On Tuesday 19 February 2013 20:39:08 R A Brown wrote:

                                  > On 19/02/2013 16:11, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
                                  > > Hallo conlangers!
                                  >
                                  > > On Tuesday 19 February 2013 09:19:46 R A Brown wrote:
                                  > [snip]
                                  >
                                  > >> I cannot think of any actual examples [of bogolangs]
                                  > >> among natlangs. The Slav influence on Romanian is
                                  > >> obvious, and French acquired the front rounded vowels
                                  > >> of neighboring Germanic, but neither are bogolangs.
                                  > >
                                  > > Indeed not. French, for instance, does not have the
                                  > > kind of umlaut process German has - it arrived at its
                                  > > front rounded vowels in a completely different way.
                                  >
                                  > Yes, it did. Tho it alone of the Romancelangs has them and
                                  > the proximity and, indeed, in some places, intermingling
                                  > with Germanic speakers probably helped to maintain them.

                                  This is likely. BTW, I am pretty certain that Old High German
                                  already had [æ], [ø] and [y] even though they don't show up in
                                  writing - they were allophones of /a/, /o/ and /u/ then, and
                                  there was no need marking them in writing as the conditioning
                                  /i/ was still present where they occurred. Only when unstressed
                                  vowels were reduced in Middle High German, the front rounded
                                  vowels and /æ/ became separate phonemes and had to be marked in
                                  writing.

                                  The strong Germanic superstratum influence on Old French probably
                                  has something to do with the existence of front rounded vowels
                                  in French alone among the major Romance languages.

                                  > [...]
                                  > > Yes. This is a great difference between British Celtic
                                  > > and a hypothetical British Romance. British Celtic had
                                  > > no dialect continuum on the continent to connect with
                                  > > after about 400 AD, as Continental Celtic was extinct.
                                  > > British Romance would interact with Gallo-Romance, as
                                  > > the sea connects as much as it separates. It would be
                                  > > part of the Western Romance dialect continuum.
                                  >
                                  > Yes, I think it would have to be. What is often forgotten
                                  > is that before the establishment of national standards and
                                  > universal education, the western Romance area was a
                                  > linguistic _continuum_ from Sicily to Picardy and through to
                                  > Seville and Lisbon.

                                  Yep!

                                  > IIRC Andrew assumed that there would
                                  > have been a Saxon settlement in Britain, but on a lesser
                                  > scale than *here*, and that the Romance speakers would
                                  > thereby be separated from their continental brethren and
                                  > develop independently. But IMO that is not likely. Even if
                                  > they were separated by a Saxon speaking area, they would
                                  > still have been too close to be isolated from continental
                                  > Romance; they would not have been like the Romance speakers
                                  > in the Balkans.

                                  One would have to have the Saxons break through in the south all
                                  the way to Cornwall in order to block the Britanno-Romance from
                                  access to the Channel at an early date (which Andrew did not do).

                                  > [...]
                                  > > Front rounded vowels also disappeared in Welsh;
                                  >
                                  > Yep - it is likely the Old British [u] moved forward to
                                  > rounded high central [ʉ] before becoming unrounded [ɨ] which
                                  > is maintained in the north Walian pronunciation till the
                                  > present day (in the south it has fronted still further to
                                  > become [i]). There was probably a rounded mid central vowel
                                  > before it became unrounded [ɘ] also.

                                  Yes. That's what I have read about it, too.

                                  > > whether they were preserved in Cornish is AFAIK a
                                  > > contentious matter among Cornish revivalists. Breton, at
                                  > > any rate, has them.
                                  >
                                  > Re-enforced by the French around it.

                                  Probably.

                                  > Breton has also
                                  > developed some unique features through French influence; it
                                  > alone of the modern Celtic langs has an indefinite article,
                                  > and the perfect tense is not formed with the preposition for
                                  > "after" followed by the verbnoun, as in its sister langs,
                                  > but with "to be" + perfect participle for intransitive
                                  > verbs, and "to have" + perfect participle for transitive ones.

                                  Right. These features show an SAE influence via French, and
                                  a departure from the Insular Celtic pattern.

                                  > However, back to a putative British Romance - I think the
                                  > indications are that it would not have had the front rounded
                                  > vowels of northern France.

                                  Agreed. They would probably have lost their rounding, as in
                                  English and Welsh.

                                  > > So yes, a loss of front rounded vowels in British
                                  > > Romance is not unlikely.
                                  > >
                                  > >> Old French had a rich set of diphthongs and a few
                                  > >> triphthongs besides; later these all gave way to the
                                  > >> monophthongs of modern French. I see no reason to
                                  > >> suppose that a British romance would have behaved the
                                  > >> same way.
                                  > >
                                  > > I see no such reason, either. British Romance may have
                                  > > a rich inventory of diphthongs and triphthongs.
                                  >
                                  > It may well have done. They Welsh are fond of diphthongs
                                  > and English doesn't exactly lack them, so I think the
                                  > preservation of them is likely.

                                  Makes perfect sense. This language may have lots of diphthongs!

                                  > [snip]
                                  >
                                  > > And as for the initial mutations of Brithenig, it is far
                                  > > from certain that a British Romance language would have
                                  > > them. After all, English doesn't.
                                  >
                                  > Yet it shares other areal features with Welsh. I've referred
                                  > in an earlier email to the preservation of [θ] and [ð] in
                                  > both languages (one could also add the preservation of [w]),

                                  Yes, such areal features exist without doubt, even if the pathways
                                  at which the relevant languages arrive at them are different, and
                                  do not imply parallel sound changes.

                                  > but more striking IMO is the development of periphrastic
                                  > tenses with "to be" to express progressive or continuous
                                  > action. Such things are, of course, not unknown in Italian
                                  > with "stare" plus the gerund, but I think this construction
                                  > would have become as common place in Brit-Romance as it is
                                  > in modern English.

                                  Fine. It would thus not be a surprise to meet such constructions
                                  in Britanno-Romance.

                                  > > This of course raises the question *when* these mutations
                                  > > arose in the Insular Celtic languages. Most Celticists
                                  > > AFAIK assume that they happened between 400 and 800 AD
                                  > > (and Continental Celtic languages never developed them,
                                  > > Dan Jones's Arvorec notwithstanding),
                                  > >
                                  > :)

                                  I have a Continental Celtic lostlang on the back burner, meant
                                  to be spoken in the French Alps, with no trace of initial
                                  mutations or other Insular Celtic features.

                                  > Yes, this is a features which is not areal since, as you
                                  > observe, English does not have it. Although they are an
                                  > interesting feature, I am doubtful that a Romance language
                                  > would actually have developed grammaticalized initial
                                  > consonant mutation.

                                  I wouldn't say it was impossible, but I don't think it is
                                  very likely.

                                  This Britanno-Romance thing is certainly an interesting project
                                  for the LLL, but alas, I have enough things to do already.

                                  > > but the name _Britannia_ seems to have a mutated initial
                                  > > (otherwise it would be _**Pritannia_, cf. Welsh
                                  > > _Prydein_) - but the /t/ in it shows that intervocalic
                                  > > lenition had not happened yet in British Celtic of 2000
                                  > > years ago.
                                  >
                                  > I don't think much can be made of this. The various Greek,
                                  > Latin & British/Welsh forms are derivatives of some
                                  > pre-Celtic and, almost certainly, pre-IE ethnicon - from Old
                                  > Albic? :)

                                  The etymology I am familiar with ascribes it to a Proto-Celtic
                                  *kWritan- 'many-coloured', but I have no idea where that comes
                                  from. It may indeed come from a pre-IE language. Maybe Old
                                  Albic _prith_ 'colour'? (Ah, now I know what the Old Albic
                                  word for 'colour' is.)

                                  > We don't know what was going on in that unknown language.

                                  Indeed not.

                                  > [snip]
                                  >
                                  > >> Yes - there usually has to be some fudging here because
                                  > >> other languages rarely have the same phonetic inventory
                                  > >> as Vulgar Latin.
                                  > >
                                  > > Amen! I had to fudge the sound changes, especially the
                                  > > vowel changes, *a lot* when I was doing Roman Germanech
                                  > > because Common West Germanic is quite far away from
                                  > > Vulgar Latin in terms of phonology!
                                  >
                                  > Always a problem for bogolangers. :)

                                  Indeed!

                                  > ========================================================
                                  >
                                  > On 19/02/2013 18:13, James Kane wrote:
                                  > > Romanian is almost a real life altlang
                                  >
                                  > Except for the small fact that it actually developed and
                                  > exists in this world!
                                  >
                                  > An _altlang_ by definition 'exists' in an alternate timeline.

                                  Yes, and thus a language spoken *here* is not an altlang.

                                  > > and IMO quite a cool language. It doesn't have an
                                  > > identical phonology to the surrounding Balkan or Slavic
                                  > > languages, nor did it go through the same sound changes
                                  >
                                  > Exactly - it ain't a living example of a bogolang.

                                  It just isn't!

                                  > > but it is obviously influenced by them and different
                                  > > enough from the other Romance languages (while still
                                  > > obviously Romance) without resembling greatly any other
                                  > > language.
                                  >
                                  > There are resemblances to Romancelangs in the Balkan area
                                  > that have now died out, and it does show certain features
                                  > that make kinship with Italian fairly obvious.

                                  Correct. There are a number of Italian-Romanian isoglosses.

                                  > One will notice that the Romansch dialects have similarly
                                  > been influenced by the high German dialects spoken in
                                  > contiguous areas, and the Moorish influence in Spanish is
                                  > noticeable.

                                  As is the Basque influence in Spanish and Portuguese.

                                  > I admit Romanian is interesting, but I don't think any more
                                  > or less remarkable than most other Romancelangs (personally
                                  > I find the Reto-romance and the Sardinian dialects more
                                  > interesting).

                                  Romanian has some traits that set it off from other Romance
                                  languages, such as its two-case system (which is of a different
                                  type than the Old French one), and its obviously Slavic-
                                  influenced phonology, but it should have become clear by now
                                  that it is not a real-life bogolang!

                                  > I fail to understand how a living language
                                  > can be "almost a real life altlang."

                                  A "real life altlang" is a contradiction in terms.

                                  --
                                  ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                                  http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
                                  "Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1
                                • Roger Mills
                                  ... Romanian is almost a real life altlang and IMO quite a cool language. It doesn t have an identical phonology to the surrounding Balkan or Slavic languages,
                                  Message 16 of 28 , Feb 19, 2013
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- On Tue, 2/19/13, James Kane <kanejam@...> wrote:
                                    Romanian is almost a real life altlang and IMO quite a cool language. It doesn't have an identical phonology to the surrounding Balkan or Slavic languages, nor did it go through the same sound changes but it is obviously influenced by them and different enough from the other Romance languages (while still obviously Romance) without resembling greatly any other language.
                                    =========================================

                                    Indeed. Years ago, when I was in Rome, I listened to Radio Vatican a lot (good music!). Then they'd have broadcasts in various languages....One was obviously Romance, but nothing I was familiar with. Maybe Catalan?? But noooo-- it was Romanian !!

                                    General question: what's the "etymology" of _bogolang_? bogus??? It's new to me. Incidentally I find "glosarch" a perfectly good formation--- after all, we have autarch (Gene Wolfe's books), heresiarch and a few others (tetrarch IIRC, what's that?), hardly in wide circulation.
                                  • Alex Fink
                                    ... Bogus , yes. For me the term calls particularly to mind Geoff Eddy s primer which invents a Slavicised romlang:
                                    Message 17 of 28 , Feb 19, 2013
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:54:06 -0800, Roger Mills <romiltz@...> wrote:

                                      >General question: what's the "etymology" of _bogolang_? bogus??? It's new to me. Incidentally I find "glosarch" a perfectly good formation--- after all, we have autarch (Gene Wolfe's books), heresiarch and a few others (tetrarch IIRC, what's that?), hardly in wide circulation.

                                      "Bogus", yes. For me the term calls particularly to mind Geoff Eddy's primer which invents a Slavicised romlang:
                                      http://jc.tech-galaxy.com/bricka/bogo_linguistics.html
                                      If I read the initial paragraph not too wrongly, Geoff was the first one to apply "bogus" to the process but the formation "bogolang" was someone else's contribution.

                                      On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 21:33:37 +0100, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...> wrote:

                                      >On Tuesday 19 February 2013 20:39:08 R A Brown wrote:
                                      >
                                      >> I fail to understand how a living language
                                      >> can be "almost a real life altlang."
                                      >
                                      >A "real life altlang" is a contradiction in terms.

                                      Agreed, as is "real life bogolang"; this part of the thread is kinda fatuous. If we try to force the terms to apply to natlangs we catch anything that has had its phonology (for that's the part conlangers usually substitute) influenced by language contact effects, and that's a lot. Even if two natlangs did converge phonologically so much that the sound changes applying to them eventually became identical, what is there to make one the template and one the bogus one?

                                      Alex
                                    • father's personal
                                      ... General question: what s the etymology of _bogolang_? bogus??? It s new to me. Incidentally I find glosarch a perfectly good formation--- after all, we
                                      Message 18 of 28 , Feb 19, 2013
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        ----- Original Message -----
                                        --- On Tue, 2/19/13, James Kane <kanejam@...> wrote:

                                        General question: what's the "etymology" of _bogolang_? bogus??? It's new to me. Incidentally I find "glosarch" a perfectly good formation--- after all, we have autarch (Gene Wolfe's books), heresiarch and a few others (tetrarch IIRC, what's that?), hardly in wide circulation.

                                        ====================
                                        A tetrarch is the ruler of a fourth. There are several uses of it in Roman history. I am most familiar with its use in the New Testament as the Roman name for the four sons of Herod the Great. Rome would not give rule over the whole country to one man and divided Judea into four portions, one for each of them, thus breaking up a potential hot spot. There is some discussion, though, as to whether there were three or four divisions. Luke in his gospel mentions Herod Antipas as the tetrarch of Galilee.

                                        Charlie
                                      • James Kane
                                        ... What if Latin survived in the Balkan sprachbund? Probably what I really mean is that Romanian is interesting in its evolution and divergence. Of course a
                                        Message 19 of 28 , Feb 20, 2013
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          > One will notice that the Romansch dialects have similarly
                                          > been influenced by the high German dialects spoken in
                                          > contiguous areas, and the Moorish influence in Spanish is
                                          > noticeable.
                                          >
                                          > I admit Romanian is interesting, but I don't think any more
                                          > or less remarkable than most other Romancelangs (personally
                                          > I find the Reto-romance and the Sardinian dialects more
                                          > interesting). I fail to understand how a living language
                                          > can be "almost a real life altlang."
                                          >

                                          'What if Latin survived in the Balkan sprachbund?'

                                          Probably what I really mean is that Romanian is interesting in its evolution and divergence.

                                          Of course a language cannot be a real world example of an altlang, but it could certainly be used as an example of language changes that make a language unique in that it is not quite Balkan or Slavic or Greek but influenced by all of these and quite far from the other Romance languages in terms of its irregular plurals and noun case and postposed definite article etc. one could say that about all the Romance languages - the Rhaeto-Romance languages obviously show similar divergence - or even all languages in the world, but real-life languages are where conlangers get their inspiration from so I see no problem in drawing analogues to certain types of conlangs.
                                        • BPJ
                                          ... But that s what allows them to break out of the bogosphere and into the altosphere (yes, intentiontally ambiguous coinage!) so it s actually a good thing.
                                          Message 20 of 28 , Feb 20, 2013
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            On 2013-02-19 20:39, R A Brown wrote:
                                            >>> Yes - there usually has to be some fudging here because
                                            >>> other languages rarely have the same phonetic inventory
                                            >>> as Vulgar Latin.
                                            >>
                                            >> Amen! I had to fudge the sound changes, especially the
                                            >> vowel changes, *a lot* when I was doing Roman Germanech
                                            >> because Common West Germanic is quite far away from
                                            >> Vulgar Latin in terms of phonology!
                                            >
                                            > Always a problem for bogolangers. :)

                                            But that's what allows them to break out of the
                                            bogosphere and into the altosphere (yes, intentiontally
                                            ambiguous coinage!) so it's actually a good thing. I
                                            found that doing a bogolang a second time wasn't
                                            anywhere near as fun as the first time -- especially
                                            not when it wasn't also a way of learning about one of
                                            the languages in the mix -- but starting to think in
                                            terms of what *realistically* could have happened
                                            to language A under conditions B, proved more
                                            interesting, yet you generally need to peg even an
                                            altlang on something, like what features of English and
                                            Welsh are areal/Sprachbund features which perhaps could
                                            have existed in a Brittanno-Romance language. It's
                                            still essentially the same beast -- langauge A on
                                            language B's turf, with the difference that one tries
                                            to create something which *might* have evolved under
                                            normal conditions of language evolution as we know them
                                            by humans like us, as opposed to something that absolutely
                                            *could not* have so evolved.

                                            My own Rhodrese is a case in point: it started out
                                            decades ago as my 'ideal' mix between French and
                                            Italian, which was certainly not realistic: essentially
                                            Italian with apocope, syncope and dipthongization of VL
                                            /e:/ and /o:/ -- actually Spanish style since it
                                            applied in closed syllables as well -- and even of
                                            *Latin* /a:/ since in youthful folly I thought the
                                            merger of Latin /a/ and /a:/ in VL was a terrible loss!
                                            :-) When I decided to redo it some years ago wanted to
                                            strive for realism but I also decided that my aesthetic
                                            predilections were going to have the last word,
                                            preferably coming up with some plausible scenario for
                                            how it came to be so. Unfortunately the result wasn't
                                            too bloody different: Occitan[^1] with Francien-style
                                            diphthongization instead of Italian with bastard Hispano-
                                            Francien-style diphthongization, and only the faintest
                                            Italian influence in vocabulary and verbal system. Its
                                            perhaps most redeeming trait is totally unrealistic:
                                            *Germanic-style* i-umlaut triggered i.a. by an Italian-
                                            style development of -AS, -OS, -ES into */i/. The only
                                            thing which doesn't make it a total parody is the
                                            premise that it beside being at least plausible
                                            above all should reflect its author's aesthetic
                                            predilections; the only thing which could save it
                                            would be finding some more or less a-priori trait
                                            which would both be agreable to those predilections
                                            and capable of being made plausible.

                                            An altlang without side-glances on what actually grew
                                            up in the same soil is just an arbitrary a-posteriori
                                            conlang of indeterminate plausibility, and one which
                                            does make such side-glances runs the risk of becoming a
                                            parody of the thing glanced at, unless it is spiced up
                                            with something which is probably implausible. Neither
                                            is that much of an improvement over the bogolang unless
                                            one keeps in mind that the main goal of conlanging is
                                            aesthetic gratification and learning about Language,
                                            and you may do that as well through both -- perhaps
                                            even more through the bogolang since it gives
                                            opportunity to contemplate *how* and *why* its super-
                                            and substrate differ.

                                            /bpj

                                            [^1]: Occitan, which BTW *is* -- historically speaking,
                                            at least ;-( -- a major Romance language *and* has
                                            front rounded vowels like the whole 'Gallo- Italian'
                                            subgroup.
                                          • carolandray+ray
                                            I m away from home & having to use webmail, so formatting may not be brilliant. ... [snip] ... _May_ allow them if: 1. the situation is a plausible one, e.g.
                                            Message 21 of 28 , Feb 21, 2013
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              I'm away from home & having to use webmail, so formatting
                                              may not be brilliant.

                                              On 20.02.2013 23:01, BPJ wrote:
                                              > On 2013-02-19 20:39, R A Brown wrote:
                                              [snip]
                                              >>> Amen! I had to fudge the sound changes, especially the
                                              >>> vowel changes, *a lot* when I was doing Roman Germanech
                                              >>> because Common West Germanic is quite far away from
                                              >>> Vulgar Latin in terms of phonology!
                                              >>
                                              >> Always a problem for bogolangers. :)
                                              >
                                              > But that's what allows them to break out of the
                                              > bogosphere and into the altosphere (yes, intentiontally
                                              > ambiguous coinage!)

                                              _May_ allow them if:
                                              1. the situation is a plausible one, e.g. applying Bantu
                                              phonological developments to Vulgar Latin is IMHO not a
                                              plausible scenario and no altlang, as I understand the word,
                                              will result.
                                              2. the conlanger has the nous to allow such a break in a
                                              plausible situation.

                                              > so it's actually a good thing.

                                              Not necessarily IMO. Some bogolangs I've seen remain
                                              bogolangs & do not cross the threshold into the altosphere.

                                              [snip]
                                              > yet you generally need to peg even an
                                              > altlang on something, like what features of English and
                                              > Welsh are areal/Sprachbund features which perhaps could
                                              > have existed in a Brittanno-Romance language. It's
                                              > still essentially the same beast -- langauge A on
                                              > language B's turf,

                                              No - that is not the same as applying, say, Welsh or Irish or
                                              Germanic diachronic sound changes to Vulgar Latin. AIUI a
                                              bogolang is produced by:
                                              1. taking language A;
                                              2. forming a "master plan" from the diachronic sound of language B;
                                              3. applying the "master plan" to language A.

                                              That is *not* the way I would develop, say, a Britanno-Romance lang.

                                              > with the difference that one tries
                                              > to create something which *might* have evolved under
                                              > normal conditions of language evolution as we know them
                                              > by humans like us, as opposed to something that absolutely
                                              > *could not* have so evolved.

                                              Of course.

                                              > My own Rhodrese is a case in point: it started out
                                              > decades ago as my 'ideal' mix between French and
                                              > Italian, which was certainly not realistic:

                                              I'm not sure what "ideal" means in that context.

                                              As this was a dialect _continuum_ from Sicily to Picardy, there
                                              was in reality a whole band of "mix between French and Italian"
                                              languages. Some may well still survive despite attempts of schools
                                              to impose the national languages of the two countries within their
                                              national borders.
                                              essentially

                                              [snip]
                                              >
                                              > An altlang without side-glances on what actually grew
                                              > up in the same soil is just an arbitrary a-posteriori
                                              > conlang of indeterminate plausibility, and one which
                                              > does make such side-glances runs the risk of becoming a
                                              > parody of the thing glanced at,

                                              It does run such a risk, if the side glances are not checked
                                              and kept in balance. As I've observed before, I think Brithenig
                                              paid undue attention to Welsh, including...

                                              > unless it is spiced up
                                              > with something which is probably implausible.

                                              ...the implausible (IMO) spelling of [v] as _f_ in a Romancelang.
                                              Implausibility may add spice, but then the thing passes from the
                                              altosphere into the artosphere.

                                              > Neither
                                              > is that much of an improvement over the bogolang unless
                                              > one keeps in mind that the main goal of conlanging is
                                              > aesthetic gratification and learning about Language,

                                              Is it? I agree with "learning about language", but is all
                                              conlanging about "aesthetic gratification"? Some auxlangers
                                              may want a result that is aesthetically pleasing, but I am not
                                              convinced that they all do. I'm not certain that aesthetics are
                                              a prime concern of engelangers.

                                              Aesthetic considerations certainly do not play any part in TAKE; it
                                              was just an experiment in trying to produce an "ancient Greek without
                                              inflexions." Nor I convinced that way back in the 17th century Dr
                                              Outis
                                              was concerned with aesthetics any more than his near contemporary
                                              Philippe
                                              Labbé was.

                                              Ray.
                                            • Jörg Rhiemeier
                                              Hallo conlangers! ... Never mind. It came out OK. ... Yes. ... I have seen several bogolangs that were broken beyond repair, usually starting with an utterly
                                              Message 22 of 28 , Feb 21, 2013
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Hallo conlangers!

                                                On Thursday 21 February 2013 11:20:03 R A Brown wrote:

                                                > I'm away from home & having to use webmail, so formatting
                                                > may not be brilliant.

                                                Never mind. It came out OK.

                                                > On 20.02.2013 23:01, BPJ wrote:
                                                > > On 2013-02-19 20:39, R A Brown wrote:
                                                > [snip]
                                                >
                                                > >>> Amen! I had to fudge the sound changes, especially the
                                                > >>> vowel changes, *a lot* when I was doing Roman Germanech
                                                > >>> because Common West Germanic is quite far away from
                                                > >>> Vulgar Latin in terms of phonology!
                                                > >>
                                                > >> Always a problem for bogolangers. :)
                                                > >
                                                > > But that's what allows them to break out of the
                                                > > bogosphere and into the altosphere (yes, intentiontally
                                                > > ambiguous coinage!)
                                                >
                                                > _May_ allow them if:
                                                > 1. the situation is a plausible one, e.g. applying Bantu
                                                > phonological developments to Vulgar Latin is IMHO not a
                                                > plausible scenario and no altlang, as I understand the word,
                                                > will result.
                                                > 2. the conlanger has the nous to allow such a break in a
                                                > plausible situation.

                                                Yes.

                                                > > so it's actually a good thing.
                                                >
                                                > Not necessarily IMO. Some bogolangs I've seen remain
                                                > bogolangs & do not cross the threshold into the altosphere.

                                                I have seen several bogolangs that were broken beyond repair,
                                                usually starting with an utterly implausible scenario (often
                                                involving Roman mercenaries in Africa, China or wherever).

                                                A common failure mode of bogolangs is to ignore those phonemes
                                                of the starting language which are not covered by the GMP because
                                                the language the GMP is based on does not have them, and leave
                                                them unchanged in the midst of the turmoil.

                                                > [snip]
                                                >
                                                > > yet you generally need to peg even an
                                                > >
                                                > > altlang on something, like what features of English and
                                                > > Welsh are areal/Sprachbund features which perhaps could
                                                > > have existed in a Brittanno-Romance language. It's
                                                > > still essentially the same beast -- langauge A on
                                                > > language B's turf,
                                                >
                                                > No - that is not the same as applying, say, Welsh or Irish or
                                                > Germanic diachronic sound changes to Vulgar Latin. AIUI a
                                                > bogolang is produced by:
                                                > 1. taking language A;
                                                > 2. forming a "master plan" from the diachronic sound of language B;
                                                > 3. applying the "master plan" to language A.

                                                Yes, that's how the word _bogolang_ is usually defined.

                                                > That is *not* the way I would develop, say, a Britanno-Romance lang.

                                                Indeed not!

                                                My Hesperic family, a family of European lostlangs meant to
                                                represent the residues of a Neolithic European language family,
                                                will not contain *any* bogolangs. Some of the languages are
                                                *inspired* by the phonologies of Indo-European languages of the
                                                relevant region, which I justify by assuming areal influences
                                                being in play, and some parallels in the sound changes occur
                                                here or there (for instance, Proto-Alpianic has undergone a
                                                consonant shift not unlike the High German consonant shift
                                                - in its complete and thorough form as found in Swiss German,
                                                complete with velar affricates - but it is not the same shift,
                                                starting, to mention one point, with *three* grades of stops
                                                rather than two in German, and many other things, such as the
                                                vowels, have developed in utterly different ways), and there will
                                                be three Albic languages showing some resemblance to Welsh, Irish
                                                and Quenya respectively, but even those won't be bogolangs. It is
                                                infinitely more realistic and especially more *fun* to develop
                                                your own sound changes than to apply those of an existing language
                                                to another language!

                                                Geoff Eddy, author of Breathanach, had a conlang family, named
                                                "Sunovian", which seemed to involve a great degree of bogolanging,
                                                applying sound changes of various IE languages and of Quenya to
                                                an a priori proto-language.

                                                > > with the difference that one tries
                                                > > to create something which *might* have evolved under
                                                > > normal conditions of language evolution as we know them
                                                > > by humans like us, as opposed to something that absolutely
                                                > > *could not* have so evolved.
                                                >
                                                > Of course.

                                                Yes. Some artlangs could never have so evolved. Of course, this
                                                does not necessarily mean that the language was a bad artlang, if
                                                the motivation is not one of realism. But an altlang or a lostlang
                                                must be crafted in a way that one can say, "Yes, this language
                                                could have evolved that way", otherwise it is a failure.

                                                > > My own Rhodrese is a case in point: it started out
                                                > > decades ago as my 'ideal' mix between French and
                                                > > Italian, which was certainly not realistic:
                                                > I'm not sure what "ideal" means in that context.

                                                Nor am I. Ideal things live on a separate tier of existence
                                                which in turn only exists in the mind of Platonists ;)

                                                > As this was a dialect _continuum_ from Sicily to Picardy, there
                                                > was in reality a whole band of "mix between French and Italian"
                                                > languages. Some may well still survive despite attempts of schools
                                                > to impose the national languages of the two countries within their
                                                > national borders.

                                                Yep. The dialects of northern Italy, I have been told, show
                                                many features where they are closer to Gallo-Romance than to
                                                Standard Italian.

                                                > essentially
                                                >
                                                > [snip]
                                                >
                                                > > An altlang without side-glances on what actually grew
                                                > > up in the same soil is just an arbitrary a-posteriori
                                                > > conlang of indeterminate plausibility, and one which
                                                > > does make such side-glances runs the risk of becoming a
                                                > > parody of the thing glanced at,
                                                >
                                                > It does run such a risk, if the side glances are not checked
                                                > and kept in balance. As I've observed before, I think Brithenig
                                                > paid undue attention to Welsh, including...

                                                It did.

                                                > > unless it is spiced up
                                                > > with something which is probably implausible.
                                                >
                                                > ...the implausible (IMO) spelling of [v] as _f_ in a Romancelang.

                                                Yes. Romance spelling is largely etymological, and you'd only
                                                get _f_ for /v/ if you have a /f/ > /v/ rule, which Brithenig
                                                IMHO doesn't have. (Not that I'd have a clue how _f_ ended up
                                                representing /v/ in Welsh, though.)

                                                > Implausibility may add spice, but then the thing passes from the
                                                > altosphere into the artosphere.

                                                Certainly.

                                                > > Neither
                                                > > is that much of an improvement over the bogolang unless
                                                > > one keeps in mind that the main goal of conlanging is
                                                > > aesthetic gratification and learning about Language,
                                                >
                                                > Is it? I agree with "learning about language", but is all
                                                > conlanging about "aesthetic gratification"? Some auxlangers
                                                > may want a result that is aesthetically pleasing, but I am not
                                                > convinced that they all do. I'm not certain that aesthetics are
                                                > a prime concern of engelangers.

                                                Head on. Aesthetic gratification is a goal in many (but not
                                                all) artlangs; Tolkien's Elvish languages are a case in point.
                                                It is less of a concern of engelangers (who strive for a more
                                                rational notion of "elegance"), or of auxlangers.

                                                > Aesthetic considerations certainly do not play any part in TAKE; it
                                                > was just an experiment in trying to produce an "ancient Greek without
                                                > inflexions." Nor I convinced that way back in the 17th century Dr
                                                > Outis
                                                > was concerned with aesthetics any more than his near contemporary
                                                > Philippe
                                                > Labbé was.

                                                Yep.

                                                > Ray.

                                                --
                                                ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                                                http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
                                                "Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1
                                              • BPJ
                                                ... OK, I should have added if the scenario isn t all too outrageous. ... OK, so maybe I m expecting to much of the average newbie, but essentially I agree
                                                Message 23 of 28 , Feb 21, 2013
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  On 2013-02-21 11:20, carolandray+ray wrote:
                                                  > I'm away from home & having to use webmail, so formatting
                                                  > may not be brilliant.
                                                  >
                                                  > On 20.02.2013 23:01, BPJ wrote:
                                                  >> On 2013-02-19 20:39, R A Brown wrote:
                                                  > [snip]
                                                  >>>> Amen! I had to fudge the sound changes, especially the
                                                  >>>> vowel changes, *a lot* when I was doing Roman Germanech
                                                  >>>> because Common West Germanic is quite far away from
                                                  >>>> Vulgar Latin in terms of phonology!
                                                  >>>
                                                  >>> Always a problem for bogolangers. :)
                                                  >>
                                                  >> But that's what allows them to break out of the
                                                  >> bogosphere and into the altosphere (yes, intentiontally
                                                  >> ambiguous coinage!)
                                                  >
                                                  > _May_ allow them if:
                                                  > 1. the situation is a plausible one, e.g. applying Bantu
                                                  > phonological developments to Vulgar Latin is IMHO not a
                                                  > plausible scenario and no altlang, as I understand the word,
                                                  > will result.

                                                  OK, I should have added "if the scenario isn't all too outrageous.

                                                  > 2. the conlanger has the nous to allow such a break in a
                                                  > plausible situation.

                                                  OK, so maybe I'm expecting to much of the average newbie,
                                                  but essentially I agree with these points.

                                                  >
                                                  >> so it's actually a good thing.
                                                  >
                                                  > Not necessarily IMO. Some bogolangs I've seen remain
                                                  > bogolangs & do not cross the threshold into the altosphere.

                                                  Surely. Did I say otherwise? "Allow" and "make" ain't the same thing.

                                                  > [snip]
                                                  >> yet you generally need to peg even an
                                                  >> altlang on something, like what features of English and
                                                  >> Welsh are areal/Sprachbund features which perhaps could
                                                  >> have existed in a Brittanno-Romance language. It's
                                                  >> still essentially the same beast -- langauge A on
                                                  >> language B's turf,
                                                  >
                                                  > No - that is not the same as applying, say, Welsh or Irish or
                                                  > Germanic diachronic sound changes to Vulgar Latin. AIUI a
                                                  > bogolang is produced by:
                                                  > 1. taking language A;
                                                  > 2. forming a "master plan" from the diachronic sound of language B;
                                                  > 3. applying the "master plan" to language A.
                                                  >
                                                  > That is *not* the way I would develop, say, a Britanno-Romance lang.

                                                  No, but strictly speaking such a language, had it
                                                  existed, might or might not have any similarities to
                                                  Welsh or English at all; there is simply no way to
                                                  know, although the lack of influence from Gaulish in
                                                  French or from Brittonic in English makes "might not"
                                                  seem the safer guess. I see nothing wrong in donning a
                                                  Montesquieuan hat as a design strategy in doing an
                                                  altlang or a bogolang, but it's as arbitrary in either
                                                  case, the difference being that the 'weak' areal
                                                  traits/sprachbund version may actually produce
                                                  something plausible. However something entirely
                                                  arbitrary, on the "sound changes I like" principle,
                                                  might be just as plausible. I actually created Rhodrese
                                                  on that principle, and it just turned out as something
                                                  which might possibly, if not probably, have arosen in
                                                  Gaul, so I located it there after the fact.

                                                  >
                                                  >> with the difference that one tries
                                                  >> to create something which *might* have evolved under
                                                  >> normal conditions of language evolution as we know them
                                                  >> by humans like us, as opposed to something that absolutely
                                                  >> *could not* have so evolved.
                                                  >
                                                  > Of course.
                                                  >
                                                  >> My own Rhodrese is a case in point: it started out
                                                  >> decades ago as my 'ideal' mix between French and
                                                  >> Italian, which was certainly not realistic:
                                                  >
                                                  > I'm not sure what "ideal" means in that context.

                                                  Note the scare quotes! My personal predilections which my
                                                  youthful self regarded as 'ideal'. I was clear about the
                                                  subjectivity, but not about the semantics of "ideal"! :-)

                                                  >
                                                  > As this was a dialect _continuum_ from Sicily to Picardy, there
                                                  > was in reality a whole band of "mix between French and Italian"
                                                  > languages. Some may well still survive despite attempts of schools
                                                  > to impose the national languages of the two countries within their
                                                  > national borders.
                                                  > essentially

                                                  Several Gallo-Italian varieties live on to varying degrees
                                                  in the Alpine valleys of Italy, where the school system's
                                                  attitude to how the students speak out of class seems much
                                                  more relaxed than (it traditionally was) in France
                                                  <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergonha>.

                                                  I see now that the particular mix of features of my
                                                  youthful "Roumain" (sic!), high mid diphthongization
                                                  *and* lack of intervocalic lenition, may perhaps be
                                                  found "sur la côte Sud-Est de l'Italie, depuis Molfetta
                                                  jusque dans l'intérieur des Abruzzes" which is an _ei_
                                                  area, but it still doesn't seem very interesting to my
                                                  present self. Something like the current Rhodrese --
                                                  **minus** i-umlaut -- is perhaps more *plausible* to
                                                  actually (have) exist(ed) somewhere in the continuum,
                                                  but it's not more *likely* in any way. First and last
                                                  its only raison d'être is as a reflection of my
                                                  personal lámatyáve, but I do also wish for it to
                                                  possess a modicum of plausibility which "Roumain"
                                                  didn't. There's no telling how my self thirty years
                                                  into the future will judge it of course.

                                                  > [snip]
                                                  >>
                                                  >> An altlang without side-glances on what actually grew
                                                  >> up in the same soil is just an arbitrary a-posteriori
                                                  >> conlang of indeterminate plausibility, and one which
                                                  >> does make such side-glances runs the risk of becoming a
                                                  >> parody of the thing glanced at,
                                                  >
                                                  > It does run such a risk, if the side glances are not checked
                                                  > and kept in balance. As I've observed before, I think Brithenig
                                                  > paid undue attention to Welsh, including...
                                                  >
                                                  >> unless it is spiced up
                                                  >> with something which is probably implausible.
                                                  >
                                                  > ...the implausible (IMO) spelling of [v] as _f_ in a Romancelang.
                                                  > Implausibility may add spice, but then the thing passes from the
                                                  > altosphere into the artosphere.

                                                  Yes, at least unless VL /f/ were regularly lenited to
                                                  /v/, but then intervocalic /f/ was rather rare in
                                                  Latin. Actually a Britanno-Romance which coexisted with
                                                  Old English could have picked up the _f_ == [v] mapping
                                                  from OE; not very likely but possible.

                                                  I'd say spelling is a rather superficial aspect. I
                                                  don't think the way Rhodrese uses the digraphs _ch gh
                                                  gn gl tx_ makes it anymore like Italian, Rumantsch or
                                                  Basque *as a language*, but nor do I think that the
                                                  presence or lack of linguistic similarity makes it more
                                                  or less likely that it would have those spellings
                                                  either, though its chosen geographical and cultural
                                                  position, and the way Latin GN, C'L and X developed and
                                                  some back vowels after /k g/ ended up as front vowels
                                                  in the language, might.

                                                  >
                                                  >> Neither
                                                  >> is that much of an improvement over the bogolang unless
                                                  >> one keeps in mind that the main goal of conlanging is
                                                  >> aesthetic gratification and learning about Language,
                                                  >
                                                  > Is it? I agree with "learning about language", but is all
                                                  > conlanging about "aesthetic gratification"? Some auxlangers
                                                  > may want a result that is aesthetically pleasing, but I am not
                                                  > convinced that they all do. I'm not certain that aesthetics are
                                                  > a prime concern of engelangers.
                                                  >
                                                  > Aesthetic considerations certainly do not play any part in TAKE; it
                                                  > was just an experiment in trying to produce an "ancient Greek without
                                                  > inflexions." Nor I convinced that way back in the 17th century
                                                  > Dr Outis
                                                  > was concerned with aesthetics any more than his near contemporary
                                                  > Philippe
                                                  > Labbé was.

                                                  Perhaps not if you equate "aesthetic" with "beauty". I
                                                  don't. I think there is always an element of
                                                  consideration of artistic impact and appearance. How
                                                  much and in what way may differ of course, as do the
                                                  relevant preferences and concerns of the author and the
                                                  perceived audience. Surely even the most cacophonous
                                                  and/or mechanical engelang somehow reflects the
                                                  artistic preferences and sensibilities of its author,
                                                  or it would turn out differently. All engelangs I've
                                                  seen have some sort of 'aesthetic coherence', as does
                                                  the Black Speech which Tolkien meant to reflect his
                                                  idea of ugliness (it isn't phonaesthetically or
                                                  'morphoaesthetically' ugly to me, but the idea
                                                  expressed in its main extant text is no more or less
                                                  repulsive for that!)

                                                  /bpj
                                                • Jörg Rhiemeier
                                                  Hallo conlangers! ... Sure. Making a bogolang with a plausible scenario (I don t like this word, and prefer calling them graftlangs , as grafting is what
                                                  Message 24 of 28 , Feb 21, 2013
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Hallo conlangers!

                                                    On Thursday 21 February 2013 18:25:45 BPJ wrote:

                                                    > On 2013-02-21 11:20, carolandray+ray wrote:
                                                    > > I'm away from home & having to use webmail, so formatting
                                                    > > may not be brilliant.
                                                    > >
                                                    > > On 20.02.2013 23:01, BPJ wrote:
                                                    > >> On 2013-02-19 20:39, R A Brown wrote:
                                                    > [...]
                                                    > >> But that's what allows them to break out of the
                                                    > >> bogosphere and into the altosphere (yes, intentiontally
                                                    > >> ambiguous coinage!)
                                                    > >
                                                    > > _May_ allow them if:
                                                    > > 1. the situation is a plausible one, e.g. applying Bantu
                                                    > > phonological developments to Vulgar Latin is IMHO not a
                                                    > > plausible scenario and no altlang, as I understand the word,
                                                    > > will result.
                                                    >
                                                    > OK, I should have added "if the scenario isn't all too outrageous.
                                                    >
                                                    > > 2. the conlanger has the nous to allow such a break in a
                                                    > > plausible situation.
                                                    >
                                                    > OK, so maybe I'm expecting to much of the average newbie,
                                                    > but essentially I agree with these points.

                                                    Sure. Making a "bogolang" with a plausible scenario (I don't like
                                                    this word, and prefer calling them "graftlangs", as grafting is
                                                    what happens here) is a cheap and easy way of getting to a passable
                                                    (though not really a good) altlang, or at least to a first draft
                                                    of an altlang, which can be refined by tweaking the sound changes
                                                    to make things make sense. (And we all know that language change
                                                    is more than just sound change!) Yet, a really *good* altlang
                                                    needs more work than just grafting sound changes of language A
                                                    onto language B. You have to tweak the sound changes to match
                                                    the phonology of language B, which always will be different from
                                                    that of language A; you need to account for the morphology and
                                                    syntax, etc.

                                                    > >> so it's actually a good thing.
                                                    > >
                                                    > > Not necessarily IMO. Some bogolangs I've seen remain
                                                    > > bogolangs & do not cross the threshold into the altosphere.
                                                    >
                                                    > Surely. Did I say otherwise? "Allow" and "make" ain't the same thing.

                                                    Indeed not.

                                                    > > [snip]
                                                    > >
                                                    > >> yet you generally need to peg even an
                                                    > >>
                                                    > >> altlang on something, like what features of English and
                                                    > >> Welsh are areal/Sprachbund features which perhaps could
                                                    > >> have existed in a Brittanno-Romance language. It's
                                                    > >> still essentially the same beast -- langauge A on
                                                    > >> language B's turf,
                                                    > >
                                                    > > No - that is not the same as applying, say, Welsh or Irish or
                                                    > > Germanic diachronic sound changes to Vulgar Latin. AIUI a
                                                    > > bogolang is produced by:
                                                    > > 1. taking language A;
                                                    > > 2. forming a "master plan" from the diachronic sound of language B;
                                                    > > 3. applying the "master plan" to language A.
                                                    > >
                                                    > > That is *not* the way I would develop, say, a Britanno-Romance lang.
                                                    >
                                                    > No, but strictly speaking such a language, had it
                                                    > existed, might or might not have any similarities to
                                                    > Welsh or English at all; there is simply no way to
                                                    > know, although the lack of influence from Gaulish in
                                                    > French or from Brittonic in English makes "might not"
                                                    > seem the safer guess.

                                                    Indeed there is no way to know what kind of language would have
                                                    evolved in Britain if Latin had survived there; assuming that
                                                    it evolved in similar ways as Welsh is just an application of
                                                    the "ceteris paribus" principle that is widely considered a
                                                    "tool of the trade" among alternative history writers.

                                                    But the ceteris paribus principle does not always work out well,
                                                    and there are differences between British Celtic and a British
                                                    Vulgar Latin, such as the latter being in contact with a
                                                    continental dialect continuum while the former is not.

                                                    And finally, the ceteris paribus principle in this case led to
                                                    an *interesting* conlang. While one may be of the opinion that
                                                    a Modern British Romance would be much like many other Romance
                                                    languages, Brithenig shows a number of traits that set it aside
                                                    from the usual Romance fare, such as its initial mutations.

                                                    Surely, Brithenig is among the better among the many romlangs
                                                    that have appeared in the last 15 years - it is quite plausible
                                                    (as opposed to "Bantu-Romance" or "Sino-Romance" languages),
                                                    and it shows some interesting departures from the Standard
                                                    Average European structure of the Romance natlangs - and that
                                                    in quite a plausible way (after all, Welsh shows that a
                                                    language with those features could evolve in Britain)!

                                                    > I see nothing wrong in donning a
                                                    > Montesquieuan hat as a design strategy in doing an
                                                    > altlang or a bogolang, but it's as arbitrary in either
                                                    > case, the difference being that the 'weak' areal
                                                    > traits/sprachbund version may actually produce
                                                    > something plausible.

                                                    Right. Brithenig is just *one* of many languages which *could*
                                                    have evolved in Britain if Latin had prevailed there; there is
                                                    nothing in it which could not have happened, I think.

                                                    > However something entirely
                                                    > arbitrary, on the "sound changes I like" principle,
                                                    > might be just as plausible.

                                                    Yes!

                                                    > I actually created Rhodrese
                                                    > on that principle, and it just turned out as something
                                                    > which might possibly, if not probably, have arosen in
                                                    > Gaul, so I located it there after the fact.

                                                    The current location of Roman Germanech in the Odenwald is also
                                                    after the fact. The language started as a language spoken in
                                                    the entirety of Germany in a timeline where Varus defeated
                                                    Arminius and Germany all the way to the Elbe river became a
                                                    Roman province. This was considered for addition to Ill
                                                    Bethisad, but never canonized and abandoned later. When I
                                                    started the League of Lost Languages, I decided that Roman
                                                    Germanech could be the Romance language that survived in the
                                                    Mosel valley *here* until about 1100.

                                                    The snag was that the sound changes of that Romance language
                                                    variety are known (they just weren't known to *me*), and turned
                                                    out to be utterly different from those of Roman Germanech
                                                    (basically, Mosel Romance was just an "ordinary" northern Gallo-
                                                    Romance language). Also, the sound changes of Roman Germanech
                                                    did not match those of the *German* dialects of that area (most
                                                    glaringly, the Mosel valley is north of the Speyer line, the
                                                    northern limit of the /p/ > /pf/ change which occurred in Roman
                                                    Germanech just as in Standard German).

                                                    I needed to find a place in Germany where the Romans have once
                                                    been, that had a more or less "fitting" dialect, and was
                                                    sufficiently out of the way of the main traffic arteries to
                                                    allow the survival of a Romance language pocket. The Odenwald
                                                    at least got close enough to such a location and I could not
                                                    find a better one (Thuringia, the homeland of Standard German,
                                                    would have been perfect with regard to the local dialect, but
                                                    it was utterly beyond the limits of the Roman Empire!), so I
                                                    placed the language there.

                                                    > >> with the difference that one tries
                                                    > >> to create something which *might* have evolved under
                                                    > >> normal conditions of language evolution as we know them
                                                    > >> by humans like us, as opposed to something that absolutely
                                                    > >> *could not* have so evolved.
                                                    > >
                                                    > > Of course.
                                                    > >
                                                    > >> My own Rhodrese is a case in point: it started out
                                                    > >> decades ago as my 'ideal' mix between French and
                                                    > >
                                                    > >> Italian, which was certainly not realistic:
                                                    > > I'm not sure what "ideal" means in that context.
                                                    >
                                                    > Note the scare quotes! My personal predilections which my
                                                    > youthful self regarded as 'ideal'. I was clear about the
                                                    > subjectivity, but not about the semantics of "ideal"! :-)

                                                    Sure.

                                                    > > As this was a dialect _continuum_ from Sicily to Picardy, there
                                                    > > was in reality a whole band of "mix between French and Italian"
                                                    > > languages. Some may well still survive despite attempts of schools
                                                    > > to impose the national languages of the two countries within their
                                                    > > national borders.
                                                    > > essentially
                                                    >
                                                    > Several Gallo-Italian varieties live on to varying degrees
                                                    > in the Alpine valleys of Italy, where the school system's
                                                    > attitude to how the students speak out of class seems much
                                                    > more relaxed than (it traditionally was) in France
                                                    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergonha>.

                                                    Yes.

                                                    > I see now that the particular mix of features of my
                                                    > youthful "Roumain" (sic!), high mid diphthongization
                                                    > *and* lack of intervocalic lenition, may perhaps be
                                                    > found "sur la côte Sud-Est de l'Italie, depuis Molfetta
                                                    > jusque dans l'intérieur des Abruzzes" which is an _ei_
                                                    > area, but it still doesn't seem very interesting to my
                                                    > present self. Something like the current Rhodrese --
                                                    > **minus** i-umlaut -- is perhaps more *plausible* to
                                                    > actually (have) exist(ed) somewhere in the continuum,
                                                    > but it's not more *likely* in any way. First and last
                                                    > its only raison d'être is as a reflection of my
                                                    > personal lámatyáve, but I do also wish for it to
                                                    > possess a modicum of plausibility which "Roumain"
                                                    > didn't. There's no telling how my self thirty years
                                                    > into the future will judge it of course.

                                                    I now feel that Roman Germanech is a rather mediocre conlang,
                                                    at any rate not getting anywhere near what I can achieve now
                                                    in Old Albic; even the lesser members of the Hesperic family
                                                    can at least compete with it. Yet, it has some strong points,
                                                    such as the "leapfrogging" change of VL /E/ and /O/ to /i/ and
                                                    /u/, respectively, which was not even intended that way but
                                                    fell out of the combination of Western Romance /E, O/ >
                                                    /ie, uo/ and German /ie, yø, uo/ > /i:, y:, u:/. It is not so
                                                    decrepit that I feel like trashing it; but I do not have any
                                                    further plans with it, other than finishing up and publicating
                                                    a grammar sketch with a few sample texts and some vocabulary.

                                                    > [...]
                                                    > > ...the implausible (IMO) spelling of [v] as _f_ in a Romancelang.
                                                    > > Implausibility may add spice, but then the thing passes from the
                                                    > > altosphere into the artosphere.
                                                    >
                                                    > Yes, at least unless VL /f/ were regularly lenited to
                                                    > /v/, but then intervocalic /f/ was rather rare in
                                                    > Latin.

                                                    It was. Latin /f/ could occur word-internally only in the
                                                    second members of compounds and in prefixed forms.

                                                    > Actually a Britanno-Romance which coexisted with
                                                    > Old English could have picked up the _f_ == [v] mapping
                                                    > from OE; not very likely but possible.

                                                    Yes. After all, Welsh somehow came up with this convention!
                                                    Yet, if there had been a Romance continuity in Britain, there
                                                    probably would have been a stronger continuity of *writing* in
                                                    Romance Britain, and the orthography of British Romance more
                                                    in tune with the rest of Romance.

                                                    > I'd say spelling is a rather superficial aspect.

                                                    Sure.

                                                    > I
                                                    > don't think the way Rhodrese uses the digraphs _ch gh
                                                    > gn gl tx_ makes it anymore like Italian, Rumantsch or
                                                    > Basque *as a language*, but nor do I think that the
                                                    > presence or lack of linguistic similarity makes it more
                                                    > or less likely that it would have those spellings
                                                    > either, though its chosen geographical and cultural
                                                    > position, and the way Latin GN, C'L and X developed and
                                                    > some back vowels after /k g/ ended up as front vowels
                                                    > in the language, might.

                                                    My spelling of Roman Germanech is partly based on that of
                                                    German, but it is not identical, after all, the phonologies
                                                    are not the same, and I wanted Romance continuity to be
                                                    respected in it. So, I have three letters for /s/, namely
                                                    _s_ (for /s/ < Lat. /s/), _z_ (for /s/ < Lat. /t/) and
                                                    _x_ (for /s/ < Lat. /ks/). The affricate /ts/, however,
                                                    is always spelled _tz_.

                                                    > >> Neither
                                                    > >> is that much of an improvement over the bogolang unless
                                                    > >> one keeps in mind that the main goal of conlanging is
                                                    > >> aesthetic gratification and learning about Language,
                                                    > >
                                                    > > Is it? I agree with "learning about language", but is all
                                                    > > conlanging about "aesthetic gratification"? Some auxlangers
                                                    > > may want a result that is aesthetically pleasing, but I am not
                                                    > > convinced that they all do. I'm not certain that aesthetics are
                                                    > > a prime concern of engelangers.
                                                    > >
                                                    > > Aesthetic considerations certainly do not play any part in TAKE; it
                                                    > > was just an experiment in trying to produce an "ancient Greek without
                                                    > > inflexions." Nor I convinced that way back in the 17th century
                                                    > > Dr Outis
                                                    > > was concerned with aesthetics any more than his near contemporary
                                                    > > Philippe
                                                    > > Labbé was.
                                                    >
                                                    > Perhaps not if you equate "aesthetic" with "beauty". I
                                                    > don't. I think there is always an element of
                                                    > consideration of artistic impact and appearance. How
                                                    > much and in what way may differ of course, as do the
                                                    > relevant preferences and concerns of the author and the
                                                    > perceived audience. Surely even the most cacophonous
                                                    > and/or mechanical engelang somehow reflects the
                                                    > artistic preferences and sensibilities of its author,
                                                    > or it would turn out differently.

                                                    Probably. Few people want to create something they themselves
                                                    find ugly; and I don't think that engelangers are an exception
                                                    here. And often, beauty falls out of objective design goals.
                                                    Perhaps the elegant shape of a wind turbine is a good comparison
                                                    here - the wind turbine is shaped the way it is not because of
                                                    some designer's whim, but because that shape makes for an
                                                    efficient conversion of wind force into electric energy - but it
                                                    is this efficiency that results in an elegant design. (Also,
                                                    part of the beauty of a wind turbine is of course that it is a
                                                    *clean* machine, producing energy without any toxic waste
                                                    products.)

                                                    > All engelangs I've
                                                    > seen have some sort of 'aesthetic coherence', as does
                                                    > the Black Speech which Tolkien meant to reflect his
                                                    > idea of ugliness (it isn't phonaesthetically or
                                                    > 'morphoaesthetically' ugly to me, but the idea
                                                    > expressed in its main extant text is no more or less
                                                    > repulsive for that!)

                                                    Black Speech is less ugly than Klingon, if you ask me ;)

                                                    --
                                                    ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                                                    http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
                                                    "Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1
                                                  • MorphemeAddict
                                                    ... But elegance is a form of esthetics. stevo
                                                    Message 25 of 28 , Feb 21, 2013
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>wrote:

                                                      > Hallo conlangers!
                                                      >
                                                      > On Thursday 21 February 2013 11:20:03 R A Brown wrote:
                                                      >
                                                      > > I'm away from home & having to use webmail, so formatting
                                                      > > may not be brilliant.
                                                      >
                                                      > Never mind. It came out OK.
                                                      >
                                                      > > On 20.02.2013 23:01, BPJ wrote:
                                                      > > > On 2013-02-19 20:39, R A Brown wrote:
                                                      > > [snip]
                                                      > >
                                                      > > >>> Amen! I had to fudge the sound changes, especially the
                                                      > > >>> vowel changes, *a lot* when I was doing Roman Germanech
                                                      > > >>> because Common West Germanic is quite far away from
                                                      > > >>> Vulgar Latin in terms of phonology!
                                                      > > >>
                                                      > > >> Always a problem for bogolangers. :)
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > But that's what allows them to break out of the
                                                      > > > bogosphere and into the altosphere (yes, intentiontally
                                                      > > > ambiguous coinage!)
                                                      > >
                                                      > > _May_ allow them if:
                                                      > > 1. the situation is a plausible one, e.g. applying Bantu
                                                      > > phonological developments to Vulgar Latin is IMHO not a
                                                      > > plausible scenario and no altlang, as I understand the word,
                                                      > > will result.
                                                      > > 2. the conlanger has the nous to allow such a break in a
                                                      > > plausible situation.
                                                      >
                                                      > Yes.
                                                      >
                                                      > > > so it's actually a good thing.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Not necessarily IMO. Some bogolangs I've seen remain
                                                      > > bogolangs & do not cross the threshold into the altosphere.
                                                      >
                                                      > I have seen several bogolangs that were broken beyond repair,
                                                      > usually starting with an utterly implausible scenario (often
                                                      > involving Roman mercenaries in Africa, China or wherever).
                                                      >
                                                      > A common failure mode of bogolangs is to ignore those phonemes
                                                      > of the starting language which are not covered by the GMP because
                                                      > the language the GMP is based on does not have them, and leave
                                                      > them unchanged in the midst of the turmoil.
                                                      >
                                                      > > [snip]
                                                      > >
                                                      > > > yet you generally need to peg even an
                                                      > > >
                                                      > > > altlang on something, like what features of English and
                                                      > > > Welsh are areal/Sprachbund features which perhaps could
                                                      > > > have existed in a Brittanno-Romance language. It's
                                                      > > > still essentially the same beast -- langauge A on
                                                      > > > language B's turf,
                                                      > >
                                                      > > No - that is not the same as applying, say, Welsh or Irish or
                                                      > > Germanic diachronic sound changes to Vulgar Latin. AIUI a
                                                      > > bogolang is produced by:
                                                      > > 1. taking language A;
                                                      > > 2. forming a "master plan" from the diachronic sound of language B;
                                                      > > 3. applying the "master plan" to language A.
                                                      >
                                                      > Yes, that's how the word _bogolang_ is usually defined.
                                                      >
                                                      > > That is *not* the way I would develop, say, a Britanno-Romance lang.
                                                      >
                                                      > Indeed not!
                                                      >
                                                      > My Hesperic family, a family of European lostlangs meant to
                                                      > represent the residues of a Neolithic European language family,
                                                      > will not contain *any* bogolangs. Some of the languages are
                                                      > *inspired* by the phonologies of Indo-European languages of the
                                                      > relevant region, which I justify by assuming areal influences
                                                      > being in play, and some parallels in the sound changes occur
                                                      > here or there (for instance, Proto-Alpianic has undergone a
                                                      > consonant shift not unlike the High German consonant shift
                                                      > - in its complete and thorough form as found in Swiss German,
                                                      > complete with velar affricates - but it is not the same shift,
                                                      > starting, to mention one point, with *three* grades of stops
                                                      > rather than two in German, and many other things, such as the
                                                      > vowels, have developed in utterly different ways), and there will
                                                      > be three Albic languages showing some resemblance to Welsh, Irish
                                                      > and Quenya respectively, but even those won't be bogolangs. It is
                                                      > infinitely more realistic and especially more *fun* to develop
                                                      > your own sound changes than to apply those of an existing language
                                                      > to another language!
                                                      >
                                                      > Geoff Eddy, author of Breathanach, had a conlang family, named
                                                      > "Sunovian", which seemed to involve a great degree of bogolanging,
                                                      > applying sound changes of various IE languages and of Quenya to
                                                      > an a priori proto-language.
                                                      >
                                                      > > > with the difference that one tries
                                                      > > > to create something which *might* have evolved under
                                                      > > > normal conditions of language evolution as we know them
                                                      > > > by humans like us, as opposed to something that absolutely
                                                      > > > *could not* have so evolved.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Of course.
                                                      >
                                                      > Yes. Some artlangs could never have so evolved. Of course, this
                                                      > does not necessarily mean that the language was a bad artlang, if
                                                      > the motivation is not one of realism. But an altlang or a lostlang
                                                      > must be crafted in a way that one can say, "Yes, this language
                                                      > could have evolved that way", otherwise it is a failure.
                                                      >
                                                      > > > My own Rhodrese is a case in point: it started out
                                                      > > > decades ago as my 'ideal' mix between French and
                                                      > > > Italian, which was certainly not realistic:
                                                      > > I'm not sure what "ideal" means in that context.
                                                      >
                                                      > Nor am I. Ideal things live on a separate tier of existence
                                                      > which in turn only exists in the mind of Platonists ;)
                                                      >
                                                      > > As this was a dialect _continuum_ from Sicily to Picardy, there
                                                      > > was in reality a whole band of "mix between French and Italian"
                                                      > > languages. Some may well still survive despite attempts of schools
                                                      > > to impose the national languages of the two countries within their
                                                      > > national borders.
                                                      >
                                                      > Yep. The dialects of northern Italy, I have been told, show
                                                      > many features where they are closer to Gallo-Romance than to
                                                      > Standard Italian.
                                                      >
                                                      > > essentially
                                                      > >
                                                      > > [snip]
                                                      > >
                                                      > > > An altlang without side-glances on what actually grew
                                                      > > > up in the same soil is just an arbitrary a-posteriori
                                                      > > > conlang of indeterminate plausibility, and one which
                                                      > > > does make such side-glances runs the risk of becoming a
                                                      > > > parody of the thing glanced at,
                                                      > >
                                                      > > It does run such a risk, if the side glances are not checked
                                                      > > and kept in balance. As I've observed before, I think Brithenig
                                                      > > paid undue attention to Welsh, including...
                                                      >
                                                      > It did.
                                                      >
                                                      > > > unless it is spiced up
                                                      > > > with something which is probably implausible.
                                                      > >
                                                      > > ...the implausible (IMO) spelling of [v] as _f_ in a Romancelang.
                                                      >
                                                      > Yes. Romance spelling is largely etymological, and you'd only
                                                      > get _f_ for /v/ if you have a /f/ > /v/ rule, which Brithenig
                                                      > IMHO doesn't have. (Not that I'd have a clue how _f_ ended up
                                                      > representing /v/ in Welsh, though.)
                                                      >
                                                      > > Implausibility may add spice, but then the thing passes from the
                                                      > > altosphere into the artosphere.
                                                      >
                                                      > Certainly.
                                                      >
                                                      > > > Neither
                                                      > > > is that much of an improvement over the bogolang unless
                                                      > > > one keeps in mind that the main goal of conlanging is
                                                      > > > aesthetic gratification and learning about Language,
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Is it? I agree with "learning about language", but is all
                                                      > > conlanging about "aesthetic gratification"? Some auxlangers
                                                      > > may want a result that is aesthetically pleasing, but I am not
                                                      > > convinced that they all do. I'm not certain that aesthetics are
                                                      > > a prime concern of engelangers.
                                                      >
                                                      > Head on. Aesthetic gratification is a goal in many (but not
                                                      > all) artlangs; Tolkien's Elvish languages are a case in point.
                                                      > It is less of a concern of engelangers (who strive for a more
                                                      > rational notion of "elegance"),


                                                      But elegance is a form of esthetics.

                                                      stevo


                                                      > or of auxlangers.
                                                      >
                                                      > > Aesthetic considerations certainly do not play any part in TAKE; it
                                                      > > was just an experiment in trying to produce an "ancient Greek without
                                                      > > inflexions." Nor I convinced that way back in the 17th century Dr
                                                      > > Outis
                                                      > > was concerned with aesthetics any more than his near contemporary
                                                      > > Philippe
                                                      > > Labbé was.
                                                      >
                                                      > Yep.
                                                      >
                                                      > > Ray.
                                                      >
                                                      > --
                                                      > ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                                                      > http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
                                                      > "Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1
                                                      >
                                                    • Roman Rausch
                                                      ... Does it really, though? He himself calls it very different from Elvish, yet organized and expressive, as would be expected of a device of Sauron before
                                                      Message 26 of 28 , Feb 22, 2013
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        >All engelangs I've seen have some sort of 'aesthetic coherence', as does the Black Speech which Tolkien meant to reflect his idea of ugliness

                                                        Does it really, though? He himself calls it "very different from Elvish, yet organized and expressive, as would be expected of a device of Sauron before his complete corruption" (PE17:11) which sounds quite positive.
                                                        I would say that the negative connotations with the Black Speech in Middle-earth are cultural: It is, after all, the language of the great enemy who wants to destroy and enslave the known world. I also do not find it ugly: Phonetically it's well-balanced, you could do much better if you really wanted to make a language ugly - weird consonant clusters, an excess of a certain sound type, glottal stops in the unlikeliest of places to make you choke - you name it.
                                                      • BPJ
                                                        ... I couldn t agree more, but look up his description of his intentions with BS -- in Letters I think, which I don t have at hand. My own Sohlob is
                                                        Message 27 of 28 , Feb 22, 2013
                                                        • 0 Attachment
                                                          On 2013-02-22 13:16, Roman Rausch wrote:
                                                          >> All engelangs I've seen have some sort of 'aesthetic coherence', as does the Black Speech which Tolkien meant to reflect his idea of ugliness
                                                          >
                                                          > Does it really, though? He himself calls it "very different from Elvish, yet organized and expressive, as would be expected of a device of Sauron before his complete corruption" (PE17:11) which sounds quite positive.
                                                          > I would say that the negative connotations with the Black Speech in Middle-earth are cultural: It is, after all, the language of the great enemy who wants to destroy and enslave the known world. I also do not find it ugly: Phonetically it's well-balanced, you could do much better if you really wanted to make a language ugly - weird consonant clusters, an excess of a certain sound type, glottal stops in the unlikeliest of places to make you choke - you name it.
                                                          >

                                                          I couldn't agree more, but look up his description of his
                                                          intentions with BS -- in "Letters" I think, which I don't
                                                          have at hand. My own Sohlob is definitely much more similar
                                                          to BS than to the Eldarin languages, yet it has no 'evil'
                                                          connotations within its setting at all -- as if a language
                                                          could be inherently good or evil, which I don't think
                                                          JRRT thought. He made a point of pointing out that Morgoth
                                                          was a skilled omniglot too BTW!

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