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

Re: Shall we create a chat room to use romlangs?

Expand Messages
  • Capsicum
    We could use Skype for it. I prefer it to other chat programms because you don t have to tell everybody everything about you. I can t programm a chat myself
    Message 1 of 29 , Dec 4, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      We could use Skype for it. I prefer it to other chat programms because you don't have to tell everybody everything about you. I can't programm a chat myself but Skype would be good enough to start.

      I understand Latin quite well and know many word and I learnt Italian for three years in school. Maybe I would have to write in English for start because I am not fluent in those languages.

      - Capsicum
    • Marko
      Hmmm-- do you have a romlang of your own as well? I m only offering up my Spanish because my own romlang isn t developed enough to put to great use...
      Message 2 of 29 , Dec 5, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Hmmm-- do you have a romlang of your own as well? I'm only offering up my Spanish because my own romlang isn't developed enough to put to great use... otherwise I'd be all about using it over Castilian.

        As a whole, though, it seems this notion isn't gaining a lot of traction... have you tried taking this idea to the CONLANG mailing list? There are at least a few romlangers there who aren't necessarily a part of this list, so you may be able to garner up some more interest there. The ZBB might be helpful as well (though admittedly I see a lot more a priori conlangers there than anything else).

        I'm happy to participate either way, but if we want to incorporate our conlangs, I'd say the more the merrier. :-)

        -Marko

        --- In romconlang@yahoogroups.com, "Capsicum" <thomas@...> wrote:
        >
        > We could use Skype for it. I prefer it to other chat programms because you don't have to tell everybody everything about you. I can't programm a chat myself but Skype would be good enough to start.
        >
        > I understand Latin quite well and know many word and I learnt Italian for three years in school. Maybe I would have to write in English for start because I am not fluent in those languages.
        >
        > - Capsicum
        >
      • Capsicum
        Hi Marko. I did ask about a chat only here. My romlang is not far developed yet. I am trying to build some kind of Vulgar Latin dialect changed by using early
        Message 3 of 29 , Dec 5, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Marko. I did ask about a chat only here. My romlang is not far developed yet. I am trying to build some kind of Vulgar Latin dialect changed by using early Raeto-Romance phonology. It is interesting to look for sources, which are hard to find.

          I am happy about you will participate.

          Cheers
          Caps
        • Padraic Brown
          ... My penny-hapenny: Part of the reason why these sorts of proposals don t get far is that most conlangs really aren t ready for use in a live chat situation,
          Message 4 of 29 , Dec 5, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            --- On Sat, 12/5/09, Marko <codename_gimmick@...> wrote:

            >As a whole, though, it seems this notion isn't gaining a lot of >traction... have you tried taking this idea to the CONLANG mailing list? >There are at least a few romlangers there who aren't necessarily a part >of this list, so you may be able to garner up some more interest there. >The ZBB might be helpful as well (though admittedly I see a lot more a >priori conlangers there than anything else).

            >I'm happy to participate either way, but if we want to incorporate our >conlangs, I'd say the more the merrier. :-)

            My penny-hapenny:

            Part of the reason why these sorts of proposals don't get far is that most conlangs really aren't ready for use in a live chat situation, either spoken or written. First, really only one person in the whole place actually knows the language (the conlanger); next, most conlangers don't have native level fluency in their language. They have to look up words and perhaps check their reference grammer to remember how that fiddly past anterior subjunctive is supposed to go. All that takes time to accomplish, and all the while, everyone else in the chat room is shuffling about waiting for something to happen. Second, we've already got a place where our languages can be so shown off, even in conversation, and that's right here. You don't need any special services or do anything more difficult than send an email. This sort of forum gives everyone the opportunity to look, ask questions (and read the answers), plus they can try their hands at responding either with
            their own conlang or yours. Messages can be read and studied and translated at each person's own speed without having to worry about some kind of live chat situation where, by admission, most participants are going to end up talking in Spanish or English anyway.

            So, per ke n' yscrives ty couech becko c' teu nconcante?

            >-Marko

            >>--- In romconlang@yahoogro ups.com, "Capsicum" <thomas@...> wrote:
            >>
            >> We could use Skype for it. I prefer it to other chat programms because >>you don't have to tell everybody everything about you. I can't programm >>a chat myself but Skype would be good enough to start.
            >>
            >> I understand Latin quite well and know many word and I learnt Italian >>for three years in school. Maybe I would have to write in English for >>start because I am not fluent in those languages.
            >>
            >> - Capsicum
            >>
          • Capsicum
            I find it boring to wait so long for an answer. A chat room would be much better. If we try not to write Spanish or English too much it can work. Write your
            Message 5 of 29 , Dec 5, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              I find it boring to wait so long for an answer. A chat room would be much better. If we try not to write Spanish or English too much it can work. Write your language as well as you can do it spontaniously. It doesn't have to be perfect there. In the forum we can be more exact again.
            • Padraic Brown
              ... di c manerès, pothont s alcouant decker n dondplases-sois pass ces chencoelles le feaire parlier . iveri si welliont ce grup l incepir yen ncencoel,
              Message 6 of 29 , Dec 5, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                --- On Sat, 12/5/09, Capsicum <thomas@...> wrote:


                >I find it boring to wait so long for an answer. A chat room would be much >better. If we try not to write Spanish or English too much it can work. >Write your language as well as you can do it spontaniously. It doesn't >have to be perfect there. In the forum we can be more exact again.

                di c' manerès, pothont 's alcouant decker n' dondplases-sois pass ces "chencoelles le feaire parlier". iveri si welliont ce grup l' incepir yen ncencoel, n' pothem me speck dondfeaire lordeneir le siser, ag n' domplas-me pass! walenteam-el are li, mays n' beviom outh ce genès le ceaiye!

                ysperam me n' ysperes pass poz-y-moments!

                Padraic
              • Capsicum
                There is no need to be unfriendly.
                Message 7 of 29 , Dec 5, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  There is no need to be unfriendly.
                • Marko
                  I do have to concede one point that Padraic makes, Capsicum, and that s to be found simply in the point that I can t completely understand everything he posted
                  Message 8 of 29 , Dec 5, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I do have to concede one point that Padraic makes, Capsicum, and that's to be found simply in the point that I can't completely understand everything he posted in his last reply (how embarrassing on my part!). There may be some romlangs so distant from Latin, or Romance languages familiar to us, that some of us will be left struggling to communicate at all. (That said, that doesn't mean it's not worth a try to anyone who's willing to invest the effort.)

                    He also raises many other good points, though, and this one has surfaced here before. Many artlangers don't make artlangs to learn them to fluency-- a few will often even deliberately limit their corpus of words so they can move on to other projects. IOW, the goals of that language have so little to do with actually using them that they're not developed in a way that makes that very feasible.

                    Often this isn't so much the case with, say, micronational languages or personal languages (or auxlangs, of course, but that's a bit tautological, yes? ;-) ). The Talossan language boasts a huge corpus, and that's because (a) it's meant to be used with some degree of regularity by the creator's following, and (b) its policy of word creation seems to be rather liberal (i.e., no Grand Master Plan, just whatever feels good). It appears to be pretty highly functional as a result, as far as a conlang is concerned.

                    I actually have scrapped the notion of any Grand Master Plan for my (first) romlang, because unlike other conlangs I'm invested in, it is intended for use as a personal language (rather than, say, demonstrating the results of any certain contrafactual historical/diachronic-linguistic anomaly). You can see some rough patterns of phonological change in what tentative words I *have* coined, but they're far from consistent. I just want to create something fun that I can use to write with or what-have-you, for no other reason than that I would enjoy using it. I'm rather surprised to hear that (from the sound of it) you're working out a GMP in a conlang you intend to make that kind of use of-- that'll be a lot of work, at least insofar as you intend to have a reasonably complete corpus of words (but don't let me discourage you, as your ideas sound fascinating and I'm sure you can pull it off!).

                    I'm not really sure if Padraic's response was in any sort of negative spirit, but this dialogue does raise the notion that it's important not to be imposing when suggesting such a forum. I agree that this group is quite fine for showing off conlangs and exchanging ideas-- my interest in a romlang chat simply comes from (a) an interest to see some of them used in more expedient communication and (b) the fact that it would prevent this group from becoming flooded with back-and-forth exchanges of that kind in the event that your proposal were to take off (all due respect, if I were not involved in such exchanges myself, I don't know that I'd be dying to read through them to find other posts here). I almost hate to suggest this, but it really is one of your better options, in terms of finding interested parties. Have you considered inviting speakers of Romance-based auxlangs? Most of them seem quite enthusiastic to speak the ones they know, but I imagine someone would have to stipulate that issues of advocation are not to be introduced in order to keep the mood light.

                    All told, I still think this is a good idea, and I'll happily join in even if it just turns out to be a two-man ordeal. :-)

                    --- In romconlang@yahoogroups.com, "Capsicum" <thomas@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > There is no need to be unfriendly.
                    >
                  • Padraic Brown
                    ... nicaratheckès? nicaretheckès, biath c la hencouant dosfea mi lordeneir-te le feaire ridieir a lis chraves. donasi m aremer m opinièn. Padraic
                    Message 9 of 29 , Dec 6, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- On Sat, 12/5/09, Capsicum <thomas@...> wrote:

                      > There is no need to be unfriendly.

                      nicaratheckès? nicaretheckès, biath c' la hencouant dosfea mi lordeneir-te le feaire ridieir a lis chraves. donasi 'm aremer m' opinièn.

                      Padraic
                    • Capsicum
                      It s ok. I am a bit to sencitive sometimes.
                      Message 10 of 29 , Dec 6, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        It's ok. I am a bit to sencitive sometimes.
                      • Padraic Brown
                        ... Why should yóu be embarassed? It s not your conlang, and unless you ve seriously studied it, there d be no reason why anyone should expect you to
                        Message 11 of 29 , Dec 6, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- On Sun, 12/6/09, Marko <codename_gimmick@...> wrote:

                          >I do have to concede one point that Padraic makes, Capsicum, and that's >to be found simply in the point that I can't completely understand >everything he posted in his last reply (how embarrassing on my part!).

                          Why should yóu be embarassed? It's not your conlang, and unless you've seriously studied it, there'd be no reason why anyone should expect you to completely understand it!

                          As I said before, even though I wrote it, I had to check the grammar and confirm some words in the lexicon. If anyone should be embarassed, it should be me that had to look up so much stuff and had to ponder how such-and-such should best be said!

                          One truly Good Thing that comes from these kinds of exchanges, whether here in this list or out in some chat room, is that holes in the lexicon become quite apparent. A lot of the vocabulary of a conlang is "virtual". Once you know how to put words together, the conlanger sort of intuitively knows how a word should look, even if it's missing from his dictionary. There were several instances of having to fill in such virtual lexical entries since wielding Kerno the last couple days. I don't think I've written so much as two words of it the last year!

                          I've also found a few idioms, for which I am in Capsicum's debt.

                          >There may be some romlangs so distant from Latin, or Romance languages >familiar to us, that some of us will be left struggling to communicate at >all. (That said, that doesn't mean it's not worth a try to anyone who's >willing to invest the effort.)

                          Sure. Tis always worth the effort. As I said, chat rooms and the like aren't my cup of tea.

                          >He also raises many other good points, though, and this one has surfaced >here before. Many artlangers don't make artlangs to learn them to fluency->- a few will often even deliberately limit their corpus of words so they >can move on to other projects. IOW, the goals of that language have so >little to do with actually using them that they're not developed in a way >that makes that very feasible.

                          That is true. Very frequently, such languages are made to compliment an invented culture or alt-history. They don't need to be able to rewrite Dante, just so long as they can give a flavour of what the language might look like.

                          >Often this isn't so much the case with, say, micronational languages or >personal languages (or auxlangs, of course, but that's a bit >tautological, yes? ;-) ). The Talossan language boasts a huge corpus, and >that's because (a) it's meant to be used with some degree of regularity >by the creator's following, and (b) its policy of word creation seems to >be rather liberal (i.e., no Grand Master Plan, just whatever feels good). >It appears to be pretty highly functional as a result, as far as a >conlang is concerned.



                          >I actually have scrapped the notion of any Grand Master Plan for my
                          >(first) romlang, because unlike other conlangs I'm invested in, it is >intended for use as a personal language (rather than, say, demonstrating >the results of any certain contrafactual historical/diachron ic->linguistic anomaly).

                          Makes sense. If you're going to use a conlang for personal use (a lot of people use them to write journals, etc), then it makes sense for it to be easy to use!

                          >You can see some rough patterns of phonological change in what tentative >words I *have* coined, but they're far from consistent. I just want to >create something fun that I can use to write with or what-have-you, for >no other reason than that I would enjoy using it. I'm rather surprised to >hear that (from the sound of it) you're working out a GMP in a conlang >you intend to make that kind of use of-- that'll be a lot of work, at >least insofar as you intend to have a reasonably complete corpus of words >(but don't let me discourage you, as your ideas sound fascinating and I'm >sure you can pull it off!).

                          No doubt! A GMP doesn't have to be terribly complex. It's just a basic set of alchemical rules -- how you transmute a Latin (usually) word into a Romance word. It could be as simple as only a few rules on how to deal with final consonants; or it could be byzantine in its complexity, full of exceptions and intended to show detailed transmutation across tens of centuries. Mine is not terribly complex, though are some odd twists; and there is some diachronic data (particularly in the paradigms) that offer snapshots of early and medieval and early modern forms of the language.

                          If you use a cheat sheet (like Latin to Romance in Sound Charts), it can become a matter of a half hour's work.

                          >I'm not really sure if Padraic's response was in any sort of negative >spirit, but this dialogue does raise the notion that it's important not >to be imposing when suggesting such a forum.

                          I wasn't suggesting that Capsicum was being imposing! Only that the suggested forum may be of limited use for most conlangers. Of course, anyone who ìs interested should do it.

                          >I agree that this group is quite fine for showing off conlangs and >exchanging ideas-- my interest in a romlang chat simply comes from (a) an >interest to see some of them used in more expedient communication

                          Good point. Though this could be done here as well as anywhere else. "Expedient communication" in your native language will be a little different and much faster than a conlang where you have to look up words and make new words on the fly and check grammar.

                          >and (b) the fact that it would prevent this group from becoming flooded >with back-and-forth exchanges of that kind in the event that your >proposal were to take off (all due respect, if I were not involved in >such exchanges myself, I don't know that I'd be dying to read through >them to find other posts here).

                          A valid concern. Though it must be noted that Romconlang is not exactly a high volume list! Our all-time record for monthly posts is 164 (Jan 2007). High traffic lists like Conlang, before posting limits were imposed, could manage that in a day.

                          A system of subject line tags could be used to mark such exchanges. That way anyone not interested could simply delete unread.

                          >I almost hate to suggest this, but it really is one of your better >options, in terms of finding interested parties. Have you considered >inviting speakers of Romance-based auxlangs? Most of them seem quite >enthusiastic to speak the ones they know, but I imagine someone would >have to stipulate that issues of advocation are not to be introduced in >order to keep the mood light.

                          Cor. Now thát's Pandora's box. As I recall, the gods separated the Auxlangers from the Conlangers (the debate rages as to who are the demons and who are the angels!) in order to keep all the superheated politics in a separate place. I'm not entirely convinced that auxlang politics can be kept separate from auxlang use (by partisans or creators, mind). They seem to be pretty tightly bound!

                          >All told, I still think this is a good idea, and I'll happily join in >even if it just turns out to be a two-man ordeal. :-)

                          Then like I said before: I wish you two well! ;)))

                          Padraic

                          > --- In romconlang@yahoogro ups.com, "Capsicum" <thomas@...> wrote:
                          >>
                          >> There is no need to be unfriendly.
                          >>
                        • Padraic Brown
                          ... nuy rhen. canquen domdeues-le l pregeoir di ti si ays c becko comprensió o c becko nidevinació? Padraic
                          Message 12 of 29 , Dec 6, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- On Sun, 12/6/09, Capsicum <thomas@...> wrote:

                            >It's ok. I am a bit to sencitive sometimes.

                            nuy rhen. canquen domdeues-le 'l pregeoir di ti si ays c' becko comprensió o c' becko nidevinació?

                            Padraic
                          • Capsicum
                            I look at what you write and then I understand it more or less but I did not understand all because it was only quick looks. I am much used to do that with
                            Message 13 of 29 , Dec 6, 2009
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I look at what you write and then I understand it more or less but I did not understand all because it was only quick looks. I am much used to do that with other languages.

                              Capsicum

                              --- In romconlang@yahoogroups.com, Padraic Brown <elemtilas@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > --- On Sun, 12/6/09, Capsicum <thomas@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > >It's ok. I am a bit to sencitive sometimes.
                              >
                              > nuy rhen. canquen domdeues-le 'l pregeoir di ti si ays c' becko comprensió o c' becko nidevinació?
                              >
                              > Padraic
                              >
                            • Capsicum
                              Maybe I answer to quickley. I got a bit a lazy day and I do not feel well.
                              Message 14 of 29 , Dec 6, 2009
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Maybe I answer to quickley. I got a bit a lazy day and I do not feel well.
                              • Padraic Brown
                                ... coues ty feais-el? Padraic
                                Message 15 of 29 , Dec 6, 2009
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- On Sun, 12/6/09, Capsicum <thomas@...> wrote:

                                  >I look at what you write and then I understand it more or less but I did >not understand all because it was only quick looks. I am much used to do >that with other languages.

                                  coues ty feais-el?

                                  Padraic

                                  >Capsicum
                                • Capsicum
                                  I don t know. I look and there it goes.
                                  Message 16 of 29 , Dec 6, 2009
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    I don't know. I look and there it goes.
                                  • Capsicum
                                    I enjoy it to write messages with you like that. :)
                                    Message 17 of 29 , Dec 6, 2009
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      I enjoy it to write messages with you like that. :)
                                    • Padraic Brown
                                      ... a Chapsicke, hey me enjoies-lo ayust! dos-ay li dixtcieoneir pergouenz ces traw gouosclèn new ag naw. mil greidh do ti! Padraic
                                      Message 18 of 29 , Dec 6, 2009
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        --- On Sun, 12/6/09, Capsicum <thomas@...> wrote:

                                        >I enjoy it to write messages with you like that. :)

                                        a Chapsicke, hey me enjoies-lo ayust! dos-ay li dixtcieoneir pergouenz ces traw gouosclèn new ag naw. mil greidh do ti!

                                        Padraic
                                      • Capsicum
                                        You change my name into that language. So is it the vocative? My conlang will have ch before a too but I will probably spell it only with c . Between
                                        Message 19 of 29 , Dec 7, 2009
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          You change my name into that language. So is it the vocative? My conlang will have 'ch' before 'a' too but I will probably spell it only with 'c'. Between vovels I am thinking about changing 'c' to 'g'. I did not ask a dictionary. It is more like good guesses. I wonder what gouosclèn could mean. New ag naw sounds for me like more or less or one by one.

                                          Mil greidh!

                                          Chapsick (right that way?)
                                        • Padraic Brown
                                          ... Yes. Capsicum -- il Capsick. ... Yes. a is the vocative particle and causes the spirant mutation, a sort of breathy h sound. Not so hard or pronounced
                                          Message 20 of 29 , Dec 7, 2009
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            --- On Mon, 12/7/09, Capsicum <thomas@...> wrote:

                                            >You change my name into that language.

                                            Yes. Capsicum --> il Capsick.

                                            >So is it the vocative?

                                            Yes. "a" is the vocative particle and causes the spirant mutation, a sort of breathy 'h' sound. Not so hard or pronounced as "Bach" or "loch" or "Chanuka".

                                            I think a couple other mutations appeared during the exchange. The accusative of your name would be lê nCapsicke. It being a novel name, it doesn't get the old fashioned -on ending, like Marcon or Caratheckon.

                                            >My conlang will have 'ch' before 'a' too but I will probably spell it >only with 'c'. Between vovels I am thinking about changing 'c' to 'g'.

                                            Intervocalic softening of this sort is rather common.

                                            >I did not ask a dictionary. It is more like good guesses.

                                            I suppose many of your guesses were right, then! But a few key obviously Romance / Latinate words at least gives some context. The rest probably looks like gibberish, even though most of the elements are Romance. ;) The verbs especially can become rather densely packed.

                                            >I wonder what gouosclèn could mean.

                                            Means "word", in its accusative form. I forgot the etymology of gouoscló, but is probably Celtic.

                                            >New ag naw sounds for me like more or less or one by one.

                                            One way numbers are expressed is to divide the whole in such a way that one can express it with two smaller numbers. Sort of poetic, but rather common even in modern speech. So, when asked how many people were at the meeting, the response might be something like ouel, goues mi thraw persèn ag naw -- "well, saw me three people and nine" -- thus twelve people were present.

                                            > Mil greidh!

                                            Rhen nonc!

                                            Padraic

                                            >Chapsick (right that way?)

                                            Close! Capsick, or Capsickus.
                                          • Adam Walker
                                            Padraic, I only caught about 505 of that, but if I understood you correctly, LOL. Adam Nivechigadu ul omu fi nu nul cunsiju djuls ímfius avevad amvuinadu, fi
                                            Message 21 of 29 , Dec 7, 2009
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Padraic, I only caught about 505 of that, but if I understood you correctly, LOL.

                                              Adam

                                              Nivechigadu ul omu fi nu nul cunsiju djuls ímfius avevad amvuinadu, fi ni nal via djuls pecadorus avevad pedizadu, fi ni nul sedigu djuls zagagadus avevad xedjidigadu.

                                              Saumu 1:1


                                              --- On Sun, 12/6/09, Padraic Brown <elemtilas@...> wrote:

                                              > From: Padraic Brown <elemtilas@...>
                                              > Subject: Re: [romconlang] Re: Shall we create a chat room to use romlangs?
                                              > To: romconlang@yahoogroups.com
                                              > Date: Sunday, December 6, 2009, 8:15 AM
                                              > --- On Sat, 12/5/09, Capsicum <thomas@...>
                                              > wrote:
                                              >
                                              > > There is no need to be unfriendly.
                                              >
                                              > nicaratheckès? nicaretheckès, biath c' la hencouant
                                              > dosfea mi lordeneir-te le feaire ridieir a lis chraves.
                                              > donasi 'm aremer m' opinièn.
                                              >
                                              > Padraic
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > ------------------------------------
                                              >
                                              > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
                                              > romconlang-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                              >
                                              > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >     romconlang-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
                                              >
                                              >
                                              >
                                            • Padraic Brown
                                              ... Padraic
                                              Message 22 of 29 , Dec 7, 2009
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                --- On Mon, 12/7/09, Adam Walker <carrajena@...> wrote:

                                                >Padraic, I only caught about 505 of that, but if I understood you >correctly, LOL.

                                                :D In Kemr, telling someone to do that is really quite rude. Shocking even. Bordering on the obscene, and definitely unfriendly! Ranks up there with "doponer-li y chornow do alchyn". Kind of like giving someone the finger, but rather worse.

                                                > Adam

                                                Padraic
                                              • Adam Walker
                                                I think i caught about 80% of that one. Adam Nivechigadu ul omu fi nu nul cunsiju djuls ímfius avevad amvuinadu, fi ni nal via djuls pecadorus avevad
                                                Message 23 of 29 , Dec 7, 2009
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  I think i caught about 80% of that one.

                                                  Adam

                                                  Nivechigadu ul omu fi nu nul cunsiju djuls ímfius avevad amvuinadu, fi ni nal via djuls pecadorus avevad pedizadu, fi ni nul sedigu djuls zagagadus avevad xedjidigadu.

                                                  Saumu 1:1


                                                  --- On Sun, 12/6/09, Padraic Brown <elemtilas@...> wrote:

                                                  > From: Padraic Brown <elemtilas@...>
                                                  > Subject: Re: [romconlang] Re: Shall we create a chat room to use romlangs?
                                                  > To: romconlang@yahoogroups.com
                                                  > Date: Sunday, December 6, 2009, 9:48 PM
                                                  > --- On Sun, 12/6/09, Capsicum <thomas@...>
                                                  > wrote:
                                                  >
                                                  > >I enjoy it to write messages with you like that. :)
                                                  >
                                                  > a Chapsicke, hey me enjoies-lo ayust! dos-ay li
                                                  > dixtcieoneir pergouenz ces traw gouosclèn new ag naw. mil
                                                  > greidh do ti!
                                                  >
                                                  > Padraic
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  > ------------------------------------
                                                  >
                                                  > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
                                                  > romconlang-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                                  >
                                                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >     romconlang-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                • Capsicum
                                                  Pedizadu, oh!
                                                  Message 24 of 29 , Dec 7, 2009
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Pedizadu, oh!
                                                  • Adam Walker
                                                    ... I first looked at that and thought, Why should you stand? Then I thought, Oh, but you misspelled it. then I realized you weren t speaking Carrajina
                                                    Message 25 of 29 , Dec 7, 2009
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      --- On Mon, 12/7/09, Capsicum <thomas@...> wrote:

                                                      > From: Capsicum <thomas@...>
                                                      > Subject: [romconlang] Re: Shall we create a chat room to use romlangs?
                                                      > To: romconlang@yahoogroups.com
                                                      > Date: Monday, December 7, 2009, 1:37 PM
                                                      > Pedizadu, oh!
                                                      >

                                                      I first looked at that and thought, "Why should you stand?" Then I thought, "Oh, but you misspelled it." then I realized you weren't speaking Carrajina at all. *crestfallen*

                                                      Adam who is exaggerating
                                                    • Marko
                                                      Backtracking quite a bit, but I m just throwing in some clarifications (and maybe another penny s worth of thoughts). I don t have much input on many later
                                                      Message 26 of 29 , Dec 7, 2009
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        Backtracking quite a bit, but I'm just throwing in some clarifications (and maybe another penny's worth of thoughts). I don't have much input on many later messages at this point anyway; I have a few left to read, though, so I might later on.

                                                        --- On Sun, 12/6/09, Marko <codename_gimmick@...> wrote:

                                                        >Why should yóu be embarassed? It's not your conlang, and unless you've seriously
                                                        >studied it, there'd be no reason why anyone should expect you to completely
                                                        >understand it!

                                                        That was just me poking fun at my own poor knowledge of Latin (by transitivity). ;-)

                                                        [...]

                                                        >One truly Good Thing that comes from these kinds of exchanges, whether here in
                                                        >this list or out in some chat room, is that holes in the lexicon become quite
                                                        >apparent. A lot of the vocabulary of a conlang is "virtual". Once you know how
                                                        >to put words together, the conlanger sort of intuitively knows how a word should
                                                        >look, even if it's missing from his dictionary. There were several instances of
                                                        >having to fill in such virtual lexical entries since wielding Kerno the last
                                                        >couple days. I don't think I've written so much as two words of it the last
                                                        >year!

                                                        >I've also found a few idioms, for which I am in Capsicum's debt.

                                                        Happy to be of help. ;-)

                                                        >>There may be some romlangs so distant from Latin, or Romance languages
                                                        >>familiar to us, that some of us will be left struggling to communicate at >>all.
                                                        (That said, that doesn't mean it's not worth a try to anyone who's >>willing to
                                                        invest the effort.)

                                                        >Sure. Tis always worth the effort. As I said, chat rooms and the like aren't my
                                                        >cup of tea.

                                                        Not usually mine either, all told, but I'm particularly curious about the outcome of this experiment.

                                                        [...]

                                                        >>I actually have scrapped the notion of any Grand Master Plan for my
                                                        >>(first) romlang, because unlike other conlangs I'm invested in, it is >>intended
                                                        for use as a personal language (rather than, say, demonstrating >>the results of
                                                        any certain contrafactual historical/diachronic->>linguistic anomaly).

                                                        >Makes sense. If you're going to use a conlang for personal use (a lot of people
                                                        >use them to write journals, etc), then it makes sense for it to be easy to use!

                                                        >>You can see some rough patterns of phonological change in what tentative >>words
                                                        I *have* coined, but they're far from consistent. I just want to >>create
                                                        something fun that I can use to write with or what-have-you, for >>no other
                                                        reason than that I would enjoy using it. I'm rather surprised to >>hear that
                                                        (from the sound of it) you're working out a GMP in a conlang >>you intend to make
                                                        that kind of use of-- that'll be a lot of work, at >>least insofar as you intend
                                                        to have a reasonably complete corpus of words >>(but don't let me discourage you,
                                                        as your ideas sound fascinating and I'm >>sure you can pull it off!).

                                                        >No doubt! A GMP doesn't have to be terribly complex. It's just a basic set of
                                                        >alchemical rules -- how you transmute a Latin (usually) word into a Romance
                                                        >word. It could be as simple as only a few rules on how to deal with final
                                                        >consonants; or it could be byzantine in its complexity, full of exceptions and
                                                        >intended to show detailed transmutation across tens of centuries. Mine is not
                                                        >terribly complex, though are some odd twists; and there is some diachronic data
                                                        >(particularly in the paradigms) that offer snapshots of early and medieval and
                                                        >early modern forms of the language.

                                                        >If you use a cheat sheet (like Latin to Romance in Sound Charts), it can become
                                                        >a matter of a half hour's work.

                                                        Well put. In that sense, I do have a cursory sort of GMP... rough rules, but chances are that if I implement any programmed sound changes, they will be few. The rest is just a general pattern of certain consonant changes, minor vowel shifts, etc. I'm the first to admit that it probably sounds a bit undisciplined, but like I said, it's all about *personal* aesthetics, so I'm more concerned with the fact that it has a Romance motif but still takes on all the forms I have in mind, however "feasible" or otherwise. (In the spirit of objectivity, I have experimented with programming sound changes, and while the final product is often fulfilling in its own way, there's an element of the process of creating [or at least manipulating] roots that gets lost in the process.)

                                                        >>I'm not really sure if Padraic's response was in any sort of negative >>spirit,
                                                        but this dialogue does raise the notion that it's important not >>to be imposing
                                                        when suggesting such a forum.

                                                        >I wasn't suggesting that Capsicum was being imposing! Only that the suggested
                                                        >forum may be of limited use for most conlangers. Of course, anyone who ìs
                                                        >interested should do it.

                                                        Oh, it wasn't my intention to single you out. I was simply referring to the fact that this is one of those discussions that could lead to bad things if not handled with care (in particular, I was fearfully anticipating someone bringing up the notion that perhaps someone else's romlang was somehow inadequate because it wasn't developed for regular use, which is, of course, absurd.) When I referred to not knowing the spirit of your message, I was simply recalling how I very literally wasn't sure what it meant. ;-)

                                                        >>I agree that this group is quite fine for showing off conlangs and >>exchanging
                                                        ideas-- my interest in a romlang chat simply comes from (a) an >>interest to see
                                                        some of them used in more expedient communication

                                                        >Good point. Though this could be done here as well as anywhere else. "Expedient
                                                        >communication" in your native language will be a little different and much
                                                        >faster than a conlang where you have to look up words and make new words on the
                                                        >fly and check grammar.

                                                        >>and (b) the fact that it would prevent this group from becoming flooded >>with
                                                        back-and-forth exchanges of that kind in the event that your >>proposal were to
                                                        take off (all due respect, if I were not involved in >>such exchanges myself, I
                                                        don't know that I'd be dying to read through >>them to find other posts here).

                                                        >A valid concern. Though it must be noted that Romconlang is not exactly a high
                                                        >volume list! Our all-time record for monthly posts is 164 (Jan 2007). High
                                                        >traffic lists like Conlang, before posting limits were imposed, could manage
                                                        >that in a day.

                                                        >A system of subject line tags could be used to mark such exchanges. That way
                                                        >anyone not interested could simply delete unread.

                                                        All true. It may come to that eventually, but in the meantime it seems we're taking this endeavor aside simply because we're the only ones involved ATM.

                                                        >>I almost hate to suggest this, but it really is one of your better >>options, in
                                                        terms of finding interested parties. Have you considered >>inviting speakers of
                                                        Romance-based auxlangs? Most of them seem quite >>enthusiastic to speak the ones
                                                        they know, but I imagine someone would >>have to stipulate that issues of
                                                        advocation are not to be introduced in >>order to keep the mood light.

                                                        >Cor. Now thát's Pandora's box. As I recall, the gods separated the Auxlangers
                                                        >from the Conlangers (the debate rages as to who are the demons and who are the
                                                        >angels!) in order to keep all the superheated politics in a separate place. I'm
                                                        >not entirely convinced that auxlang politics can be kept separate from auxlang
                                                        >use (by partisans or creators, mind). They seem to be pretty tightly bound!

                                                        Indeed, I nearly bit my tongue when I asked. I'm on the auxlang list, but I don't visit often, and with all due respect to anyone here who may also be part of that list, there's a reason for that. I don't really have many opinions on the auxlang debate, certainly none worth *SHOUTING* about-- I simply learned Esperanto for fun. Certainly there have to be others like me out there, though, no? :-P

                                                        >>All told, I still think this is a good idea, and I'll happily join in >>even if
                                                        it just turns out to be a two-man ordeal. :-)

                                                        >Then like I said before: I wish you two well! ;)))

                                                        Thanks, Padraic. ;-)

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