There are 10 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Terminology for Non-native Natives
From: Logan Kearsley
1b. Re: Terminology for Non-native Natives
From: Daniel Bowman
1c. Re: Terminology for Non-native Natives
From: BPJ
1d. Re: Terminology for Non-native Natives
From: Jim Henry
2.1. Re: R2D2 language
From: Logan Kearsley
3a. Re: Target audiences of conlangs in media (was: R2D2 language)
From: Gary Shannon
3b. Re: Target audiences of conlangs in media (was: R2D2 language)
From: MorphemeAddict
3c. Re: Target audiences of conlangs in media (was: R2D2 language)
From: Gary Shannon
4. Re: Sketch of ÄvuuÅ£xh
From: John Q
5a. Re: language vs. economics
From: Gary Shannon
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Terminology for Non-native Natives
Posted by: "Logan Kearsley" chronosur...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Apr 4, 2012 5:45 pm ((PDT))
So I'm starting to sketch out my description of Mev Pailom (to be
filled in as I actually learn to speak it), and I've come up against a
bit of uncomfortableness. In describing a pre-existing natural
language, what's correct would be defined by the judgment of a native
speaker. In this case, what's correct is defined by the judgment of me
and my fiancee, as far as what we actually end up saying and being
able to understand (as opposed to what I might just make up a-priori).
It seems wrong to refer to ourselves as native speakers since our
native languages are both English, but I don't know what else to use
to refer to a person whose speech is considered canonical for the
language. I've started using "canonical speaker" as a placeholder
term, but I wonder if there is some other existing terminology for
this sort of thing.
-l.
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Terminology for Non-native Natives
Posted by: "Daniel Bowman" danny.c.bow...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Apr 4, 2012 5:59 pm ((PDT))
How about "urspeaker". Also brings a nice Babel-textish sound to it.
2012/4/4 Logan Kearsley <chronosur...@gmail.com>
> So I'm starting to sketch out my description of Mev Pailom (to be
> filled in as I actually learn to speak it), and I've come up against a
> bit of uncomfortableness. In describing a pre-existing natural
> language, what's correct would be defined by the judgment of a native
> speaker. In this case, what's correct is defined by the judgment of me
> and my fiancee, as far as what we actually end up saying and being
> able to understand (as opposed to what I might just make up a-priori).
> It seems wrong to refer to ourselves as native speakers since our
> native languages are both English, but I don't know what else to use
> to refer to a person whose speech is considered canonical for the
> language. I've started using "canonical speaker" as a placeholder
> term, but I wonder if there is some other existing terminology for
> this sort of thing.
>
> -l.
>
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Terminology for Non-native Natives
Posted by: "BPJ" b...@melroch.se
Date: Thu Apr 5, 2012 1:28 am ((PDT))
On 2012-04-05 02:59, Daniel Bowman wrote:
> How about "urspeaker". Also brings a nice Babel-textish sound to it.
>
What, then, about "original speaker" rather than a macaronic
coinage?
Two things to note:
1. You (Logan) might reverse the meaning of
"native speaker": you and your fiancée weren't
native with the language, but the language is
native with you two in the sense that you are
the language's parents!
2. You *can* be a native speaker of more than one
language. I'm a native speaker of both Swedish
(competent in three different lects, although two
of them were acquired later, though still very
early in life) and German, although my German
grammar and vocabulary fell behind rather badly in
later years. When I became old enough to understand
that (a) most people were not bilingual, and (b) my
mom actually *was* bilingual :-) I more or less
stopped speaking German except on the trips to
Germany every year, and to my gran on the phone.
Apart from unusually having [r] rather than [Ê]
(like my mother and her non-native speaker parents,
BTW)[^1] my German accent is native. Much the same
is true of my maternal aunt BTW, although in her
case the two languages were German and Polish, and
my paternal aunt was born in Chicago of Swedish
parents and is bilingual since birth, having moved
to Sweden only as a pre-teen. At least for me and
my Swedish-American aunt the later recessive
language was originally dominant, too.
[^1]: I don't know how competent my maternal
grandmother was in her L1 (Ukrainian) in later
years, as she was only 5 y.o. when she emigrated to
Germany. Her husband, my grandfather born in
Pomerania, remained a competent Polish speaker all
his life, and also learned Russian as a POW. I did
hear the two having 'Slavic' conversations when
they didn't want us grandchildren to overhear, but
I don't know which language each of them was
speaking. Possibly each spoke in their own
language, but just as possibly my grandmother spoke
Polish. Those villages and small towns in Pomerania
where they grew up were totally bilingual even
in the 1930's, it seems, and she and her Ukrainian
siblings would have picked up Polish easier than
German, of course, modulo what German they might
have picked up from their partially ethnic German
father before WW I.
/bpj
> 2012/4/4 Logan Kearsley<chronosur...@gmail.com>
>
>> So I'm starting to sketch out my description of Mev Pailom (to be
>> filled in as I actually learn to speak it), and I've come up against a
>> bit of uncomfortableness. In describing a pre-existing natural
>> language, what's correct would be defined by the judgment of a native
>> speaker. In this case, what's correct is defined by the judgment of me
>> and my fiancee, as far as what we actually end up saying and being
>> able to understand (as opposed to what I might just make up a-priori).
>> It seems wrong to refer to ourselves as native speakers since our
>> native languages are both English, but I don't know what else to use
>> to refer to a person whose speech is considered canonical for the
>> language. I've started using "canonical speaker" as a placeholder
>> term, but I wonder if there is some other existing terminology for
>> this sort of thing.
>>
>> -l.
>>
>
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
1d. Re: Terminology for Non-native Natives
Posted by: "Jim Henry" jimhenry1...@gmail.com
Date: Thu Apr 5, 2012 2:55 am ((PDT))
On 4/4/12, Logan Kearsley <chronosur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> to refer to a person whose speech is considered canonical for the
> language. I've started using "canonical speaker" as a placeholder
> term, but I wonder if there is some other existing terminology for
> this sort of thing.
For some conlangs with a speaker community, I refer to "fluent speaker
intiution" rather than "native speaker intuition", even if the speaker
community in question does have some native speakers, like that of
Esperanto -- their judgement isn't necessarily weightier than that of
other fluent speakers. I'm guessing Mev Pailom is too new for you and
your fiancée to be fluent in it yet, though. "canonical speaker" and
"original speaker" both sound good to me.
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2.1. Re: R2D2 language
Posted by: "Logan Kearsley" chronosur...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Apr 4, 2012 5:57 pm ((PDT))
On 4 April 2012 14:59, Adam Walker <carra...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
> Well, since it has come up in two messages, I am going to respond. I like
> Eragon. I have read the frist three books and have the fourth high in my
> TBR queue. The story is NOT LOTR though there is obvious influence. It is
> also not Star Wars or any number of other works, It is its own world with
> its own rules and characters. Yes, it has elves and dwarves but they
> aren't Tolkien's elves and dwarves even though they share elements. The
> languages in Alagaesia could be more developed for my taste, but they are
> enough to give the proper flavor to the world. And the story is fun.
Just to clarify my own position, I didn't mean to be passing any sort
of judgment on Eragon here, as the book itself is somewhat irrelevant
to the point I wanted to make. It's just provides a very convenient
example of a particular kind of flawed reasoning among fans. Since
lots of people do dislike it, those who *like* it have plenty of
opportunity to defend it. Your defense is a reasonable one. Another,
from my fiancee, is "It's a fun story and it has dragons, and I have a
soft spot for anything with dragons." That allows a potential
detractor to understand "OK, I guess you have different ideas of which
aspects of the art are more important than I do, so that makes sense."
A bad but extremely common defense is something like "well, it's
pretty good for a 19 year old". To which one can only say "Good for
him, I'm sure he's a great person, but what does that have to do with
the art?"
Generically, it's a fallacy of irrelevancy. And I see defense of
Mando'a the same way. It adds flavor to a book. Great, if the
publisher and the fans are satisfied, it's fulfilled it's goals and
cannot be detracted in that context. But what does that have to with
it's evaluation *as a conlang*? Nothing, neither for nor against.
-l.
Messages in this topic (42)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Target audiences of conlangs in media (was: R2D2 language)
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" fizi...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Apr 4, 2012 9:41 pm ((PDT))
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhieme...@web.de> wrote:
>
> Yes. Those who care for the languages look deeper and are
> disappointed when they find that the languages work just like
> English and the glyphs are just a letter substitution cipher.
> Those who don't care for the languages won't complain about
> such naive conlangs, but they won't complain about languages
> that are "too difficult". This is not like a Prisoner's
> Dilemma, it is like Pascal's Wager, where you can only win or
> draw but never lose when you "believe in God" and make a good
> conlang. (Pascal's Wager goes like this: If God exists, he will
> reward me if I believe, and censure me if I don't. If God
> doesn't exist, it makes no difference whether I believe or not.
> Hence, it is rational to believe in God.)
At the very least the author could, with very little more effort than
it takes to create a relex of English, create a relex of something
slightly more obscure like Maori or one of the less well-known Bantu
languages. An author could even just pick up a Thai travelers phrase
book and relex the phrases, or even just use Google translate to
create a proto sentence in, say Malay, or Icelandic and then relex
that word for word. Who cares if the Google translate gives you
correct Icelandic? You declare it to be correct Gorfic grammar (or
whatever you name your language) and just relex it in some simple
formulaic manner:
To the king must be given his tribute. From the king can be expected
his service. (English)
Til konungs verður að gefa skattinn hans. Frá konungi má búast við
þjónustu sína. (Google's Icelandic)
Dur jaliken gunyin on numo plochukya boken. Mono jalikura feolt tan
riakikli pulo. (Relexed to Gorfic)
Instant credible conlang complete with verb and noun inflections (and
irregular verbs), since the relex is done systematically.
--gary
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Target audiences of conlangs in media (was: R2D2 language)
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" lytl...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Apr 4, 2012 10:03 pm ((PDT))
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 12:41 AM, Gary Shannon <fizi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhieme...@web.de>
> wrote:
> >
> > Yes. Those who care for the languages look deeper and are
> > disappointed when they find that the languages work just like
> > English and the glyphs are just a letter substitution cipher.
> > Those who don't care for the languages won't complain about
> > such naive conlangs, but they won't complain about languages
> > that are "too difficult". This is not like a Prisoner's
> > Dilemma, it is like Pascal's Wager, where you can only win or
> > draw but never lose when you "believe in God" and make a good
> > conlang. (Pascal's Wager goes like this: If God exists, he will
> > reward me if I believe, and censure me if I don't. If God
> > doesn't exist, it makes no difference whether I believe or not.
> > Hence, it is rational to believe in God.)
>
> At the very least the author could, with very little more effort than
> it takes to create a relex of English, create a relex of something
> slightly more obscure like Maori or one of the less well-known Bantu
> languages. An author could even just pick up a Thai travelers phrase
> book and relex the phrases, or even just use Google translate to
> create a proto sentence in, say Malay, or Icelandic and then relex
> that word for word. Who cares if the Google translate gives you
> correct Icelandic? You declare it to be correct Gorfic grammar (or
> whatever you name your language) and just relex it in some simple
> formulaic manner:
>
> To the king must be given his tribute. From the king can be expected
> his service. (English)
> Til konungs verður að gefa skattinn hans. Frá konungi má búast við
> þjónustu sína. (Google's Icelandic)
> Dur jaliken gunyin on numo plochukya boken. Mono jalikura feolt tan
> riakikli pulo. (Relexed to Gorfic)
>
> Instant credible conlang complete with verb and noun inflections (and
> irregular verbs), since the relex is done systematically.
>
> It seems like you substituted sounds (a>o, l>r, etc.). Is there a distinct
word for this kind of relex? I understand relex to be a word-for-word
substitution, rather than sound-for-sound (or letter-for-letter).
stevo
> --gary
>
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: Target audiences of conlangs in media (was: R2D2 language)
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" fizi...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Apr 4, 2012 10:58 pm ((PDT))
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:03 PM, MorphemeAddict <lytl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 12:41 AM, Gary Shannon <fizi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> or even just use Google translate to
>> create a proto sentence in, say Malay, or Icelandic and then relex
>> that word for word. Who cares if the Google translate gives you
>> correct Icelandic? You declare it to be correct Gorfic grammar (or
>> whatever you name your language) and just relex it in some simple
>> formulaic manner:
>>
>> To the king must be given his tribute. From the king can be expected
>> his service. (English)
>> Til konungs verður að gefa skattinn hans. Frá konungi má búast við
>> þjónustu sína. (Google's Icelandic)
>> Dur jaliken gunyin on numo plochukya boken. Mono jalikura feolt tan
>> riakikli pulo. (Relexed to Gorfic)
>>
>> Instant credible conlang complete with verb and noun inflections (and
>> irregular verbs), since the relex is done systematically.
>>
>> It seems like you substituted sounds (a>o, l>r, etc.). Is there a distinct
> word for this kind of relex? I understand relex to be a word-for-word
> substitution, rather than sound-for-sound (or letter-for-letter).
>
> stevo
I don't know. I guess you could consider it a cipher. On the other
hand I just did it quickly and off the top of my head so I'm sure
there are errors in my "translation". If I were going to do it for a
novel I'd spend at least a couple hours drawing up a complete chart of
"cipher" substitutions. Clusters could become single letters and vice
versa, (r -> ch; str -> p; ...) and some new sounds could be created
for the new alphabet, or some sounds could be removed. Either way,
just as long as the phonemic inventory was different from English.
The main reason I did it that way was so that verb conjugations and
noun declensions would be preserved. If {amare, amo, amas, amat}
becomes {erevo, eru, erim, eris} then you have "created" a "new"
system of verb conjugation. If the language is one that is not widely
known very few will ever figure out that it's a relex of a natlang.
Take for example http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/5762
--gary
--gary
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. Re: Sketch of ÄvuuÅ£xh
Posted by: "John Q" jquijad...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Apr 4, 2012 9:53 pm ((PDT))
Eugene Oh wrote:
>I like this very much! I have to confess I initially thought you might have
typoed "muddle" for "middle" - but was very pleasantly surprised by a novel
invention.
>
>Eugene
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>On 2 Apr 2012, at 01:37, Jim Henry <jimhenry1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This is just a sketch, so far, of some syntactic ideas I've been
>> playing with recently. I don't really have a phonology yet, so to
>> keep things simple, I've borrowed the phonology and romanization of
>> Ithkuil wholesale until I figure out what I want ÄvuuÅ£xh (a nonce
>> name) to really sound like.
>>
>> The core of ÄvuuÅ£xh is the voice system. There are four voices:
>> active, passive, receptive, and muddle.
>>
>> The active voice is the unmarked one:
>>
>> mbëq xûlâdh nteîm
>> man bites dog-ACC
>>
>> mbëq fkôôw çtîsem nteîz
>> man gives bone-ACC dog-DAT
>>
>> The passive voice is about what you'd expect, promoting the
>> patient/direct object to the subject slot and making the agent oblique
>> and omissible:
>>
>> nteî xûlâţ (mbëqan)
>> dog gets.bitten (by man)
>>
>> The receptive voice is used with ditransitive verbs, prototypically
>> "give"; it promotes the recipient argument to the subject slot and
>> makes the agent oblique and omissible:
>>
>> nteî fkôôm çtîsem (mbëqan)
>> dog gets.given bone-ACC (from man)
>>
>> The muddle voice puts all the arguments of the verb in the malefactive
>> case, lined up after ther verb in no particular order.
>>
>> xûlâd mbëqââ nteîg
>> bite-MUDDLE man-MAL dog-MAL
>> Biting occurs, involving a man and a dog.
>>
>> fkôômb nteîg çtîsegya mbëqââ
>> give-MUDDLE dog-MAL bone-MAL man-MAL
>> Giving occurs, involving a dog, a bone and a man.
>>
>> Work on this conlang has been going pretty slowly, as gjâ-zym-byn is
>> taking up most of my creative energies that don't go into writing
>> fiction, but maybe by this time next year I'll have a phonology and a
>> kinship system.
>>
>> --
>> Jim Henry
>> http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry
=================================================
Funny, I too first read it as "middle" voice and didn't notice it was
"MUDDLE" until Eugene pointed it out. Clever nomenclature, Jim, for a very
clever idea for a voice category.
--John Q.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. Re: language vs. economics
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" fizi...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Apr 4, 2012 9:59 pm ((PDT))
WoW! That was a very fascinating video. The implication of his general
health statistics is that natural selection favors people who speak
languages with a weak sense of future.
I look forward to hearing more about this.
--gary
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:55 PM, MorphemeAddict <lytl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I found the following video very interesting.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=m9x8l9vXU9w
>
Messages in this topic (5)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
conlang-nor...@yahoogroups.com
conlang-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
conlang-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
