Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
- On 2013-06-25 at 16:55:17 -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> Another data point: my wife always writes emails in all lowercase, evenI am guilty of that, too: when writing emails I tend to forget about
> though she doesn't do that in handwriting. I find it rather jarring, but
> OTOH it's not hard to read at all. In fact, it has a more informal feel
> to it than a Properly Capitalized message.
capitalizing the first letter of a paragraph. I don't think that
legibility suffers from it because in emails paragraphs are divided
by a full empty line, not just a bit of indenting. Most of the times
I do capitalize the first letter of a mid-paragraph sentence,
there there are no additional clues except for punctuation.
I suspect that this is also my brain telling me that emails are
a bit closer to conversation than other written material,
expecially when answering inline-quoted messages:
the first paragraph after an inline quote is the one that
I capitalize less often.
on the other hand, I usually capitalize personal nouns, except sometimes
for geographical derived ones, mostly because my natlang doesn't
capitalize them, and I forget about it.
I also capitalize Is, maybe because I find it an innatural thing
to do (my natlang has a tendency to capitalize "you"s in formal /
outdated styles, to mark respect) and I had to force myself to
learn it. The fact that in handwriting I use different shapes
for I as 1st person and I and capitalized i in any other word
may be related to it.
Returning to one of the original subjects of the thread, romanization of
conlangs that have no capital distinction in their native scripts,
IMHO an early reason to adopt a romanization is not helping the
reader but helping the writer: entering latin characters on a computer
is much easier than writing a custom font + keyboard map / entry
method for a conscript.
In this case, I believe it is quite natural to choose romanization
conventions that follow a bit more closely the ones of a native script,
and capitalization sounds like the first english convention
Elena ``of Valhalla''
- 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.
> 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
"Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1