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

Re: Fwd: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters

Expand Messages
  • George Corley
    ... We all have different preferences, but I do very much think it s valuable to use capitalization at the beginning of sentences and for proper nouns. That
    Message 1 of 37 , Jun 25, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 1:24 PM, BPJ <bpj@...> wrote:

      >
      > I'm not. I'm just strongly opinionated, as you are WRT
      > capitalization. In both cases the people who design
      > orthographies/**transliterations/**transcriptions do what pleases
      > *them* best. It ain't their concern to please you or me, nor
      > should it be. Most people are able to muster good arguments for
      > doing things the way they do, even when that's the opposite way
      > from one's own preference. Orthographic nitpicking serves one
      > purpose only: to put down those who don't adhere to the 'rules',
      > which seldom are about preserving the expression of grammatical,
      > phonological or semantic distinctions, and often go against that
      > single valid concern[^1]. And I make money out of that idiocy!
      >

      We all have different preferences, but I do very much think it's valuable
      to use capitalization at the beginning of sentences and for proper nouns.
      That seems to be close to the minimum use for it, and they are both
      important signals for readers used to reading languages written in Latin
      script. To me, using capitalization is a "consider the audience" type of
      question -- your audience will benefit from using some capitalization
      standards. Of course, anyone is perfectly free to make an aesthetic choice
      contrary to that. I guess part of my issue is that, to me, the romanization
      is such a utilitarian thing that I really don't think too hard about the
      aesthetics of it, just the utilitarian concerns of elegance and
      accessibility. A long time ago I put down my general thoughts on how
      romanizations should be evaluated and thoughtfully constructed here:
      http://www.gacorley.com/blog/2011/11/14/design-parameters-for-romanization.html


      > [^1]: A thousand years ago people in this part of the world made
      > just dandy with a phonologically underspecified, caseless
      > script precisely because it preserved all relevant
      > grammatical distinctions!
      >

      Not sure where you are precisely, but many writing systems are still that
      way. A few also dispense with white space, which Roman script itself didn't
      have for a good long time. But modern readers of Roman script are used to
      white space and punctuation and capitalization
      ANDTHEYFINDTEXTLIKETHISQUITEDIFFICULTTOREAD evenmoresotextlikethis. I've
      heard arguments that even for contemporaries, Roman script was harder to
      read without whitespace than it would have been with it -- there are claims
      that very few people were able to read silently when there wasn't some sort
      of word separation.
    • Jörg Rhiemeier
      Hallo conlangers! ... Yep. ... I have laid out yesterday how this is done in Old Albic. In that language, things are comparably simple because the declension
      Message 37 of 37 , Jun 28, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Hallo conlangers!

        On Thursday 27 June 2013 21:14:47 R A Brown wrote:

        > On 27/06/2013 00:57, Aodhán Aannestad wrote:
        > > Ah, that was mostly just my impression - apologies for
        > > presenting it as fact when it wasn't!
        >
        > No worries.
        >
        > The question "And a further question ( :P ) - for people
        > with IE-esque conlangs where case morphology is largely
        > inalienable from nouns, are foreign names uninflectable or
        > are they wedged somehow into the case system?" is an
        > interesting one.
        >
        > Except I would not restrict it to IE-esque conlangs. Any
        > conlang with case morphology will surely have this problem.

        Yep.

        > Indeed, there are two problems in dealing with foreign names:
        > 1. How do you put the name into the phonology of your
        > conlang, whether nouns are declined or not?
        > 2. If your language has a case system, do you leave them
        > uninflected, or some & uninflected and other inflected (as
        > in Latin & Greek), or do you assimilate them all into your
        > declension systems?
        >
        > We had a thread on 1 above not so very long ago. But 2 is
        > interesting, though, unfortunately, not one I can answer as
        > I have no conlangs with a case system. ;)

        I have laid out yesterday how this is done in Old Albic.
        In that language, things are comparably simple because the
        declension is pretty agglutinative. If your language has
        articles that inflect for case, you can use them to mark
        case on indeclinable foreign nouns. Old Albic does this
        with finite clauses that function as adverbial phrases:

        Anaphelasa Mørdindo om janom emi alarasa laras.
        AOR-entertain-3SG:P-3SG:A Mørdindo.AGT the:M-OBJ boy-OBJ
        the:I-INS AOR-sing-3SG:P-3SG:A song.OBJ
        'Mørdindo entertained the boy by that he sang a song.'

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