My proposal: A journal on constructed languages, published at regular
intervals, reviewing conlang topics in articles of the highest
quality. The journal would be published in dead-tree format, but could
be accessible over the Internet.
There is a serious gap in the academic coverage of conlangs. And we
need something to fill that gap. Medicine, physics, mathematics,
malacology all have their respected journals that are accepted as
reliable sources. For Verdurian, Ceqli or Toki Pona? Nothing.
The conlang journal would meet the most rigorous standards of
scholar****p, and would exhibit accurate application and knowledge of
linguistics (such things as the phoneme inventory and allophones, SOV
vs. SVO vs. VSO, or gender systems would be examined by what the
creator actually displays in use of the language and examples rather
than copied word-for-word from the conlanger's website). It would also
constitute exemplary journalism, with reviewers being held to accurate
fact-checking.
Topics might be: Teonaht, Sindarin, aUI, the history of Esperanto
music, roots in oligosynthetic conlangs, the effect of Adjuvilo on
IAL's, criteria in judging the relative simplicity of Loglan vs.
Lojban, the extent of borrowing words from Terran languages in
conlangs spoken on planets far, far away, or the distribution of color
words in fictional languages. No one would be allowed to review his/
her own conlang. It could be said to be a peer review of constructed
languages.
And one more thing: The conlangs being reviewed must be of real
interest to somebody other than its creator. Languages like Verdurian,
Kelen~, Brithenig and Ithkuil are definitely legitimate topics for
articles in the journal, but your new ergative personal language with
33 words you created just last week is not. Basically, review
languages that are sure to stick around.
So, how do we go about establi****ng such a journal?
|
