On Nov 8, 12:17 pm, Haya**** <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> So a conlanger can foil your pre-conceived notions merely by publi****ng
> a language design without any stated goals?
Every conlang has at the minimum implicit goals.
A typical artlang, for example, will have goals of "aesthetically
pleasing to the creator" and "able to express concepts used by
speakers in the conculture".
No creation is without intent, though many are without an explanation
thereof.
My statement was that reviewing anything is equivalent to asking "how
does this meet criteria A..Z?", and that one should pay special
attention to the goals of the author, whether they be implicit or
explicit, to see whether the conlang meets those goals optimally.
(Some of course are more difficult for an outside person to evaluate,
like what is aesthetic to the author, though even that is amenable -
one can go from what they've stated or done and address anything that
seems not to optimally fulfill the more explicit expressions of
aesthetic preference.)
> > I have no illusion that publi****ng such a journal, no matter its
> > quality, will change the academic (or general public's) opinion /
> > awareness of conlangs and conlanging overnight.
>
> Conlanging is a particularly individualistic hobby. (I guess this why
> some of the people so interested in "organizing" conlangers are not
> working on conlangs of their own; they do not have the type of strongly
> independent personality needed to be a ccnlanger.)
Is this intended as an insult to me? If so, you are clearly unfamiliar
with either my personality or my hobbies.
Also, would you say that Kalusa is not a "real" conlang because it was
created collaboratively? And that everyone who worked on it by virtue
of their participating in something so non-"individualistic", does not
"have the type of strongly independent personality needed to be a
ccnlanger"?
> "The community has no bribe that will tempt a man who is minding _his_
> _own_ business" - Thoreau
Indeed. If you want to stay to yourself, though, I wonder: why do you
participate in Usenet, or in particular, reply to this thread? That's
not "minding your own business" very well. Nor is trying to tear down
the work of others.
Remember, we're saying that if you *want* to participate, we'll
welcome you. If you don't, then fine. That's *your* issue, not ours.
> It is not clear what
> benefit a conlanger, seeking to express himself or indulge his whims
> linguistically, gains from conlangery being well-known or obscure,
> appreciated or mocked by academia.
It's also not clear what harm you have from such things. Please
explain this, because you are arguing not that we shouldn't do X, but
that *you* don't care if we do X. And frankly, I don't care if you
don't care, because I do.
Not everything we do is intended to benefit the closeted introverted
sort of conlanger, though we (perhaps ironically) count many such as
being members of our community.
Some of our activity is to enlarge the community - by introducing
people to the concept who otherwise wouldn't know about it, some small
percentage of whom will in turn decide they like it, and by
introducing people who do know about it to the availability of
community resources, such as various online discussion fora, the
conference, publications, etc. If they're not interested in some or
all of those, then that's fine by us. We just seek to make it
available for those who are.
This benefits those new members, not you, except if you choose to
participate in community fora - in which case you would benefit from
having more people with whom to talk.
Some of our activity is to encourage new kinds of exploration, such as
conlang-related academic research. This benefits those who are
interested in whatever the topic of the research is, by letting them
gain knowledge. Standing on the shoulders of giants and all that.
Some of our activity is to provide a forum for people who are
interested in doing so to share their work with a larger in a more
thought-out manner than one usually gets through IRC, Usenet, mailing
lists, etc. Again, this benefits those who are interested in such
sharing.
If you are not interested in any of this, and cannot show how you are
HARMED by it, then I would ask you to please, as you quote, mind your
own business. If you *are* interested in it, then I'd ask you to join
us in making it happen.
It's your choice. We don't force what we do on anyone, and I ask that
you be as respectful in return.
> > That is a goal that
> > will take years to achieve. But each step does make a difference,
>
> You write like a politician.
Oh noes?
If you want to argue with what I say, please take issue with the
content by giving actual rebuttals and alternative options, rather
than repeatedly engaging in pointless ad hominem attacks.
> Organization is a euphemism for hierarchy.
And slogans are a poor substitute for discussion.
- Sai
|
