Talk:Constructed language/Archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Conlangs Conference / Colloquium - April/May 2006

I am currently organizing a conlangs conference, to be held at UC Berkeley in late April / early May.

Please see http://www.livejournal.com/~ucb_lcs for more info - including the call for speakers / attendees and the preregistration form. More information will be posted to that first URL as I know it, and emailed to people who've sent me their prereg.

I'm not sure where/how to list this on the main Conlangs entry (and portal) - since this is more a 'current event' or 'invite' than regular entry info. I'd appreciate it if someone did so for me (IJzeren Jan?).

Thanks, and see y'all there!

--Sai Emrys 06:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge?

A while back, it has been proposed that we merge Fictional language with List of fictional languages. Until now, only three people have given their opinion, one against the merger, two in favour. Some more input on Talk:List of fictional languages would be appreciated. ----IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 09:26, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Language template

Conlanguine
Created by: The Pasta Chef 
Setting and usage: language for describing everyday events in terms of pasta shapes
Total speakers: 3
Category (purpose): constructed language based on pasta
Language codes
ISO 639-1: none
ISO 639-2: art
ISO/FDIS 639-3: —
Note: This page may contain IPA phonetic symbols in Unicode. See IPA chart for English for an English-​based pronunciation key.

I thought I would let those interested in conlangs know that {{language}} has been adapted for better use in conlang articles. See a silly example to the right. There is some extra flexibility built into the template, which can be seen in other language articles. I'm still working on it, so I would welcome some feedback on how to make this more conlang friendly. The benefit, I believe, in having this template on an article about a conlang is that it ties the style in with that of natural languages, and thus might add some extra respectability. --Gareth Hughes 13:36, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

now {{{Infobox Language}}} Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:28, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
It is excellent, Gareth. My compliments! It took me a while before I really understood how to use it (this is really advanced template building, wow!), but I got it now, and I have already added it to a few conlangs.
Feedback. Well, there are two things I can think of. Minor qualms, really.
First of all, it might deserve recommendation to create a special box for the year in which a language was created. Not a big deal, really, since it can as well be added after the name of the author. But if it's possible to have a separate box, that would be fine.
Secondly, classification. For the languages I have "done", I follow the following classification scheme:
But, there is also another important criterion for classification: the source of (most of the) vocabulary and grammar. The a priori vs. a posteriori distinction. And in the case of a posteriori languages, the question if a language is Romance, Slavic, etc. As you can see in Brithenig, Wenedyk, Verdurian and a few others, I've solved that for now by adding some text between brackets; but perhaps, a separate infobox would be better.
Just my 2p. --IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 14:48, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback, Jan. Creating a separate field for the year of creation should be fairly straightforward. Up until now, I've added the year of creation in brackets after the creator's name. If it feels right, I'll see if I can place the year field on the same line, but in a separate column (I know there's a spare column there already).

You could use your classification scheme with the template quite easily. It is set up so that you can use subsequent parameters named fam1, fam2 and so forth to create a hierarchy. The parameter fam1 will default to read "Afro-AsiaticAfro-AsiaticAfro-AsiaticNiger-CongoNiger-CongoNilo-SaharanNilo-SaharanKhoisanKhoisanIndo-EuropeanIndo-EuropeanCaucasianCaucasianAltaicAltaicUralicUralicDravidianDravidianPaleosiberianPaleosiberianPaleosiberianPaleosiberianPaleosiberianPaleosiberianAustronesianAustronesianAustro-AsiaticAustro-AsiaticAustro-AsiaticAustro-AsiaticSino-TibetanSino-TibetanHmong-MienAustralianAustralianPapuanPapuanTai-KadaiTai-KadaiAmericanAmericanNa-DenéNa-DenéNa-DenéEskimo-AleutEskimo-AleutCreoleCreolePidginPidginMixedMixedlanguage isolatelanguage isolatelanguage isolatelanguage isolatesign languagesign languagesign languagesign languagesconstructed languageconstructed languageconstructed languageconstructed language———" if it's left out. At the moment, the hierarchy will always close with the name of the language itself boldened.

Your comment about the multiple descent of a posteriori conlangs is fascinating: many draw inspiration from natural languages. I might have to set up a sub-template, which is called by a new parameter, to display this information. I'll have a think about this one.

I was a little concerned about two other fields for conlangs. Firstly, I'm not sure how appropriate the speakers field is: perhaps we should simply try to find the details. Many conlangs do not have any reasonable estimate as to their number of speakers. I wonder if this field should be made optional, or replaced with another. The other field I'm concerned about is nation. This only appears if agency is defined (which only really happens for the IALs). However, no conlang is the official language of an actual state, and it seems inappropriate to use this field for internal/adherent's organisations. As this is mostly IAL specific, I would like some suggestions as to how this field might be better used for them. --Gareth Hughes 17:26, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

As for the year field, it's really no big deal. The year behind the author's name works fine, too. It was merely a suggestion.
I noticed the fam2, fam3 templates too (I also tried fam4, but that didn't work). They work fine, and the family offers an acceptable alternative when something doesn't work out. The only thing, like I said, is that there are basically two ways to categorise conlangs: by purpose (artistic, fictional, auxiliary, etc.) and by vocabulary source. Folkspraak, Slovio and Interlingua are all auxlangs, but you wouldn't do justice to them by simply categorising them as such, without mentioning that they are Germanic-based, Slavic-based and Romance-based respectively. So yes, I think there should definitely be a second "family" field, containing "a priori/a posteriori/mixed" in the first line, and an eventual language family, or even a particular language (Basic English!) in the second.
As for the nation field: I agree that it's not appropriate for conlangs, even auxlangs. Would it be possible to build in a condition that it pops up when agency is defined AND when the language is not a constructed language? Or, if that's too complicated, simply turn it into an optional field? --IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 20:24, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

OK, I've added {{{date}}} to {{language}}. If you want to add the date of creation of a conlang to a separate field, simply add |date=1907, or whatever. I'm surprised that fam4 didn't work: you do need to have every level before that present (except fam1, which has a default) for it to work. Take a look at Maori, for a lot of fams! I'll keep working on the other ideas. --Gareth Hughes 21:10, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Fine, it works! :) I don't know what happened to fam4; perhaps it was just me doing something wrong. Oh, and I forget to address the issue of no. of speakers: indeed, it doesn't really matter for artistic and fictional languages (in most cases the number would be either 0 or 1). But for auxlangs it matters a lot, even though it's pretty hard to get accurate info (even the creator of the language himself won't probably). So I'd say, let it stay, even though in many cases the answer would be something like "estimated between 50 and 200" or so. --IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 21:56, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

I've implemented the suggestions. The genetic classification field now reads a priori classification. It is still filled using either family or fams. To add in a posteriori inspiration, use the parameter posteriori. The IALs that have official regulating bodies, now have a simplified 'official status' section. --Gareth Hughes 13:35, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Um, no, that's not exactly what I meant. You may have misunderstood my point regarding a priori/a posteriori. The artistic/auxiliary/engineered distinction deals basically with the purpose for which the language was designed, while the a priori/a posteriori distinction deals with the source of (the bulk of) the vocabulary). I was rather thinking along the following lines. To give you two examples (on for the a priori language Klingon, one for my own Wenedyk):
Category (purpose) constructed languages
 artistic languages
  fictional languages
   Klingon
Category (vocabulary source) constructed languages
 a priori languages
Category (purpose) constructed languages
 artistic languages
  alternative languages
   Wenedyk
Category (vocabulary source) constructed languages
 a posteriori languages
(hypothetical Romance language based on Polish)


In other words, my suggestion would be that you substitute the title of the family resp. the fam1/fam2/etc. box with "category (purpose)" or somesuch, and that you change the name of the posteriori box to "category (vocabulary source)". Or something similar. The second box might have "a priori" as a default value, so that in the case of a posteriori languages the box would need to be filled with info. --IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 14:35, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, I've switched to the headings you suggested. Have I got it right now? --Gareth Hughes 17:15, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Excellent! Yes, it's all correct now. This new version has also the advantage that it doesn't render the places where it has already been implemented incorrect. Well done, and many thanks! You can see the result of your work already at Lojban, Klingon, Brithenig and Wenedyk. When I have the time, I'll use it for all conlangs. --IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 20:50, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, there's one thing I noticed that I'm unsure about: all pages using the template are automatically categorised as "pages that contain IPA", even though in 95% of the cases they don't. I'm not sure if that's really a problem or if there's any way to go about that differently. But somehow I feel that categorision would better be brought in manually. Or, say, by using a parameter "IPA|yes/no" or something. Thoughts? --IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 09:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Forget it, I hadn't noticed the notice=nonotice feature. My bad. --IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 09:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
It's there by default because linguist-types (I suppose I include myself) feel that any decent article on a language should include a modicum of IPA. As you discovered, the nonotice option is there to turn the default notice off. I suppose the conversation over at template talk:language was all about getting editors to use IPA in all language articles. I hope you're enjoying the template. --Gareth Hughes 14:57, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
Very much, thank you again. Today on wikipedia.nl I've proposed adopting it wholesale (well, and translating it of course)... Cheers, --IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 16:34, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
I suppose that you've met Mark Dingemanse, African-languages specialist. He might give you a hand over on nl. --Gareth Hughes 16:49, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Constructed languages

As the header suggests, JonMoore and I have finally created a WikiProject Constructed languages. We discussed the possibilities, the pros and the contras of it before, but now we finally have it. Everybody who is interested is sincerely invited to join! —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 22:15, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Slightly OT: Conlangs flag & Berkeley class

If I'm out of line posting this here, let me know, but AFAIK I'm not. So, two items that may be of interest to people watching this. (I've posted about this elsewhere - eg LJ Conlangs and the CONLANG list - but I know not everyone watches those who watches here.)

1. I'm assembling a bulk order of Conlangs flags. That's the one designed on CONLANG - [1]. They will be 3'x5' grommeted screenprinted 1-side/1-ply knitted polyester. The price is dependent on # ordered; at present I have 9 people signed up for one. My quotes are $53 per for 6 orders, $31.25 for 12, and $18.50 for 36. Plus $8.50 shipping worldwide. I'm not making any money off it, and I'm not handling the actual shipping and payment - those'll be done direct with the vendor - I'm just coordinating this into a single order and making sure everyone's paying the same. If you want one, email me - conlangs@saizai (I'm a dotcom, yay) - with your name, email, and your max price. Deadline is 18 January 2006.

2. I'm doing the Conlangs DE-Cal (LJ website) at Berkeley again this year. Will try to make all videos published online again and freely available - last year's are on videos.google.com and archive.org (though about half - and the better half, too, since I do learn over time - are missing due to a massive hard drive failure :-/). It'll be more hands-on and a less lecturey / less heavy workload class than last year's, and judging by response so far it may turn out to be a rather large class. Will know more about that once I have a semi-confirmed enrollment figure, in a month or so.

Hope that's useful. --Sai Emrys 14:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regularized or prescriptive?

Rycanada (talk • contribs) has changed "regularized grammar" to "prescriptive grammar". I believe this is not the same idea. A regularized grammar (as I've always understood the term) is a grammar that has made regular, either by design from scratch or by removing irregularities from a natural language. A prescriptive grammar need not be regularized (actually it would be regulated). --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 17:06, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merger from naturalistic planned language

There has been a merger tag on Naturalistic planned language for a long time. Would anyone here care to comment on/action the proposal as I don't know the subject well enough to offer a useful input. Kcordina 14:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, and I also dug up its inevitable counterpart, Schematic planned language. Yes, I think these should be merged into Constructed language (as per ancient VfD). Give me a few days, and I'll take care of it. —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 18:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I've moved both babies into international auxiliary language, which on second though is where they belong, rather than in constructed language. —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 21:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Top work, well done! Kcordina Talk 08:56, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/o/n/Talk%7EConstructed_language_Archive2_b5f3.html"