Sost ematiko wrote:to be sincere, i found something very good in your Angos: that you use no diacritics on letters, but only a simple alphabet and easy phonology. The negative things are that trying to read your texts i can not recognise even one word or elements, your vocabulary is not close to the original Protolanguage, and, the high frequency of the sound L is in my opinion the worst thing in any language.
Dormouse559 wrote:So, if the point of an auxlang is the be easy to learn, and the elements of this ProtoLanguage "are hard for modern users", why would anyone put them in an auxlang?
In any case, are there any independent sources describing this language, because at the moment, your word is the only evidence for its existence.
That is a valid point. Don't let it get bogged down in plugs for your own projects.Sost ematiko wrote:but what i can say is that no matter how much i read it, i cannot make things out, because the elements are not close to any old languages which are also internationally widespread. This is my point regarding Angos.
And don't put words in people's mouths. He never said he didn't care about your opinion.Sost ematiko wrote:I thought its maker wanted to know to what degree his conlang is readily understandible. If he doesn't care, why should i care?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests