Sophie wrote:hashi wrote:
- And then we have the knobs who think that replacing English one letter for letter is conlanging. Someone slap them??
I'd call that codelanging – making up a "coded language".
They're generally called cyphers
Moderators:Ashucky, Dormouse559
Sophie wrote:hashi wrote:
- And then we have the knobs who think that replacing English one letter for letter is conlanging. Someone slap them??
I'd call that codelanging – making up a "coded language".
Avatar."Useful" for what? When was the last time a conlang was "useful" for anything?
Rockoff wrote:Do you guys think it's a mistake to attempt conlanging if you're only fluent in one language? I'm learning two but I'm not there yet and my first attempt at conlanging failed horribly before I even considered putting it here, I do feel like I know a lot more about languages now but perhaps I should hold off for a bit. It takes a lot of time and dedication to create an entire language and I want it to be as good as possible.
Chekhov wrote:People who just say "X can be pronounced Y or Z" without explaining where or why, you mean.
razlem wrote::P
I have e = [e]/[ɛ]; h = [h]/[x]; r = [r]/[ɾ]/[ɻ]/[l]; and no distinction between aspirates.
hashi wrote:I need to get this off my chest, but it annoys me when:
- a noob comes along and learns about phonetics and realises there's more sounds than just English ones and they get this omg-i-have-to-have-ALLOFTHEM mentality
- they think every sound, and every single variation of such needs to be represented by a unique letter (combine this with the first point and you're destined for disastrous creations like čȧûļnó òṽë đðªjŋœªøþĸ$ł€øđ€łjøªþ$£@jœþŋðđµ. Yes, you can have it be totally representative if that was a conscious choice, not if that's the only thing you can do.
- "My language is like.. what happens if Spanish is raped up the ass by French", cause these are the only languages in existence you can take ideas from. Romlangs are not cool.
- Ok, now personally I am one for breaking convention, so it really pisses me off when people say "you <x> for /θ/ because no other language does". Is this not the point in conlanging?? Gosh.
- And then we have the knobs who think that replacing English one letter for letter is conlanging. Someone slap them??
</rant>
Linguistic14 wrote:I understand it doesn't makes sense.... but if it has a history or reason... maybe that works... I once used the d as Sh because in my conlang, the word for life was shiwaaz and i had a second definition which was dalam. When I only used one word it was always shiwaaz and never dalam. But that was in my dictionary. One day, I fused them together making shawan. Shawan was also changed due to the phonology change in the new conlang. But yet I always remembered SH... in the beginning of the word shawan. The word shawan was changed to davan but pronounced as shawan due to historical reasons.
[*]And the last one... isn't conlanging... ! PLZ SLAP THEM!
YngNghymru wrote:Linguistic14 wrote:I understand it doesn't makes sense.... but if it has a history or reason... maybe that works... I once used the d as Sh because in my conlang, the word for life was shiwaaz and i had a second definition which was dalam. When I only used one word it was always shiwaaz and never dalam. But that was in my dictionary. One day, I fused them together making shawan. Shawan was also changed due to the phonology change in the new conlang. But yet I always remembered SH... in the beginning of the word shawan. The word shawan was changed to davan but pronounced as shawan due to historical reasons.
[*]And the last one... isn't conlanging... ! PLZ SLAP THEM!
I think you are confused about what constitutes a 'historic' reason - if you're saying what I think you're saying, which is that you couldn't remember a word properly so ended up writing it one way and pronouncing it the other.
linguoboy wrote:YngNghymru wrote:You don't have to be able to pronounce your language yourself - as long as phonemes are generally salient enough to not merge, whether or not an English speaker finds it difficult to distinguish them is irrelevant.
Yeah, limiting yourself to phonemes that the average English speaker can distinguish seems like a recipe for creating exactly the sort of cyphers of English that I'm always so down on. In general, there's a certain progression among noob conlangers:
Stage 1: Thesis. Your conlangs are all cyphers of your native language. Maybe there'll be a crazy feature or two (e.g. objects first! no verbs!) but they won't be very well thought out and certainly won't take into account how actual natlangs with that feature work.
Stage 2: Antithesis. Your conlangs are all kitchen-sinks. Now you've learned about all sorts of crazy features and you want to use them all so that your language is nothing like English! So you have OVS order and ergativity and eight kinds of front rounded vowel and noun cases and noun classes and polypersonal agreement on verbs etc. etc. Not even you can keep track of them all and produce sensible sentences.
Stage 3: Synthesis. Eventually, you calm down and some balance is restored. Your conlangs are more focused: Here I'm going to make a language with serial verbs, maybe with an active-stative distinction rather than transitive-intransitive. Here I'm going to make a language with a huge sibilant inventory for a race of snake people. Not everyone gets here, of course, but it's the goal you should be aiming at.
I've been laughing my ass off for far too long because of this Hegelian conlanging dialectic! It basically sums up all of my conlangs. I started with a couple of basic conlangs that were actually just Spanish with different words and the jumped to some language with a tripartite alignment, singular-dual-trial-plural distinction and a crazy phonetic inventory with ejectives and an unbalanced vowel inventory (maybe Linguoboy remembers it, it was one of the nooblangs he commented on).linguoboy wrote:Stage 1: Thesis. Your conlangs are all cyphers of your native language. Maybe there'll be a crazy feature or two (e.g. objects first! no verbs!) but they won't be very well thought out and certainly won't take into account how actual natlangs with that feature work.
Stage 2: Antithesis. Your conlangs are all kitchen-sinks. Now you've learned about all sorts of crazy features and you want to use them all so that your language is nothing like English! So you have OVS order and ergativity and eight kinds of front rounded vowel and noun cases and noun classes and polypersonal agreement on verbs etc. etc. Not even you can keep track of them all and produce sensible sentences.
Stage 3: Synthesis. Eventually, you calm down and some balance is restored. Your conlangs are more focused: Here I'm going to make a language with serial verbs, maybe with an active-stative distinction rather than transitive-intransitive. Here I'm going to make a language with a huge sibilant inventory for a race of snake people. Not everyone gets here, of course, but it's the goal you should be aiming at.
hashi wrote:[*] "My language is like.. what happens if Spanish is raped up the ass by French", cause these are the only languages in existence you can take ideas from. Romlangs are not cool.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests