[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Certainly a language is a medium of communication. My Conlang is also artistic in nature. It was done as a creative venture: can I make a Romance language that would "look" & "feel" like a Romance language, but would still be unique unto itself? My language is no more difficult to memorize than any other and was easily adaptable to the keyboard. As many romance languages use diacritics the presence _or_ absence of them is inherently artistic. The cedilla that I employ under two consonants and the grave accent over one vowel are what make my language unique among others, just as the brush stroke in a painting is unique to each artist. (I have a painter-friend who has a tremor making his brush strokes artistically unique in the world.) I would suggest that factors of comfort are indeed subjective. Some people find a hard mattress comfortable, some find a soft mattress comfortable. The very things you describe as lacking comfort are a comfort (ie. diacritics) Some people like the style of cubism and some don't. Does the presence of those who dislike it make it any less an art form? Art is not always harmonious. The most successful paintings will have some sort of tension in them. If we didn't have the tension, we would not notice the work. Vivie la arte dea linegua, Scotto Quoting Jacques Deh�e <jacquesdehe@hidden.email>: > > Un lingua, anque un conlingua, es un medio de comunication, > > non un monologo autistic. > > Factores de confort son objective: facilita de memorisation, > > adaptation al claviero (keyboard) con absentia de signos diacritic, > > etc. > > Le resultato es un lingua pure et es Arte. > > Arte es harmonia e non es autismo, hiper-agresivita et insultas. > > Cordialmente, Jacques > > * > > --- In romconlang@yahoogroups.com, Padraic Brown <elemtilas@...> > wrote: > > > > --- Jacques Deh�e <jacquesdehe@...> wrote: > > > > > > > > Inter-romance es un lingua construite, dunque > > > non native. > > > > Perhaps I misled: the conlang in question is > > "native" to this region of groups -- Romconlang, > > Conculture, Conlang, Celticonlang. > > > > > Inter-romance es diferente d'Interlingua, es > > > plus moderne, > > > ma vu es incompetente pro vider le diferentias. > > > > It's easy to understand for anyone at all who has > > had some Latin and some Spanish. Throw in a > > little bit of French or Italian and Bob's your > > uncle. To be quite honest with you, while I find > > I-R very understandable, you are reinventing the > > wheel. This is what auxlanging is all about, and > > what it's always been about! > > > > > Inter-romance non pretende devenir un lingua > > > auxiliar mundial. > > > > Perhaps not. However, the superiority complex > > you've displayed is quite in keeping with the > > usual demeanour of auxlangers. > > > > > Inter-romance permite me de ser comprendite per > > > occidental personas, > > > regretabilemente anque per fanaticos > > > hiper-agresive. > > > > > > Al contrario vu besonia usar l'inglese pro ser > > > comprendite. > > > > Indeed. It's called "using the interlanguage > > common to this group". You are undoubetly > > ignorant of the fact that we are an international > > group. The fact remains that English is the > > interlanguage par excellence hereabouts. We're > > not afraid to use our conlangs here and are not > > miffed by yours. > > > > Once again, since you seem to missed the whole > > point: we are not interested in your language as > > a means of world or regional communications. > > There are already very fine and well established > > languages that get that job done (though I know > > you aspire to auxlangy greatness!). We're > > interested in your language in so far as it's a > > constructed Romance language. > > > > > Comprehensibilita d'Inter-romance es su > > > apertura, su sanita e su honesta. > > > > We don't really care much about its > > comprehensability, Jacques. We're not auxlangers. > > You've nothing to prove here! > > > > Padraic > > > > > > > > Cordialmente, Jacques > > > > > > * > > > > > > > > > --- In romconlang@yahoogroups.com, Padraic > > > Brown <elemtilas@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- Jacques Deh�e <jacquesdehe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Un lingua incomprehensibile non pote > > > pretender > > > > > ser inspirate per le Latino ! > > > > > > > > Oi coul�! Fas ridieir a lis chraves!! > > > > > > > > (Thank you very much! I wasn't expecting such > > > > high praise!!) > > > > > > > > > Cordialmente, Jacques > > > > > > > > Listen Jocko, before you make a further arse > > > of > > > > thyself hereabouts, please do your homework. > > > > > > > > One, this is not Auxlang, but Romconlang. > > > Here, > > > > we are almost entirely artistic conlangers. > > > We > > > > tolerate your auxlang in so far as it is also > > > a > > > > Romance conlang and you seem genuinely > > > interested > > > > in discussing Romance conlangs. Your typical > > > > "your language sucks and one day my auxlang > > > will > > > > rule the world" attitude is not appreciated > > > > around here. > > > > > > > > Two, it takes more than a copy-n-paste from > > > the > > > > work of Gode et al to make a "comfortable" > > > > Romance language. It might make for a decent > > > > auxlang, but you're obviously out of your > > > depth > > > > here, as we don't generally go in for > > > simplistic > > > > planned languages and the horrific politics > > > they > > > > engender. > > > > > > > > Now, you made the comment that it is fun to > > > talk > > > > about what makes for a comfy _Romance_ > > > language. > > > > You were given a response in a native Romance > > > > conlang. Let's hear something substantive > > > please, > > > > rather than mere dismissal. We've been very > > > > tolerant and interested in your conlang > > > without > > > > resorting to dismissal. The same sort of > > > courtesy > > > > will be appreciated in future. > > > > > > > > Padraic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * > > > > > > > > > > --- In romconlang@yahoogroups.com, Henrik > > > > > Theiling <theiling@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > > Jacques Deh�e writes: > > > > > > > I mean a successful romance conlang, > > > not a > > > > > cryptogram ! > > > > > > > > > > > > Ko�?? ��ur lyng t�g er ��tt � latinn er > > > bonn > > > > > syskur pr� n�r > > > > > > �eklyngar! > > > > > > > > > > > > What?? Every language which is created > > > from > > > > > Latin is a good > > > > > success > > > > > > for us conlangers! > > > > > > > > > > > > **Henrik > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Camifi, Marusi, teterani, tester fuferios > > > asteros; tamenio > > > > vem Persaecion empuriase ed ec pasem > > > emduriase! > > > > --Pomperios Perfurios. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Ill Bethisad -- > > > > <http://www.bethisad.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > Come visit The World! -- > > > > <http://www.geocities.com/hawessos/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Camifi, Marusi, teterani, tester fuferios asteros; tamenio > > vem Persaecion empuriase ed ec pasem emduriase! > > --Pomperios Perfurios. > > > > -- > > > > Ill Bethisad -- > > <http://www.bethisad.com> > > > > > > Come visit The World! -- > > <http://www.geocities.com/hawessos/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > >