[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
--- Padraic Brown skrzypszy:
> > Examples:
> >
> > 'historical romlang': Brithenig, Wenedyk, �rj�trunn, ...
> > => grand master plan from other natlang
> >
> > 'diacronical romlang': Jovian, Rhodese, Terkunan, ...
> > => personal grand master plan
> >
> > 'artistical romlang': Aingelj�, Regimonti, ...
> > => purely artistical
>
> I see. Frankly, I would place the diachronical
> and the artistic together under artistic. Reason
> being, in my opinion, I don't see much of a
> difference between "personal GMP" and "purely
> artistic".
I think the difference is quite important. As a matter of fact, I
think category II comes much closer to category I than to category
III. The only real difference is that in I the entire GMP (or almost)
was borrowed from an existing, non-Romance natlang, which obviously
is not the case in II. From this point of view the name "historic"
vs. "diachronic" is somewhat confusing, because category II is no
less historic and category I is no less diachronic.
Of course I agree with the order: category I is definitely less
"artistic"; the rules for word creation are highly restrictive,
although I won't hide that Wenedyk is pretty full of exceptions on
the GMP, for the simple reason that I like the alternative outcome
better. Category II from this point of view leaves the creator with
more free manoevring space, for the simple reason that he can model
the GMP entirely after his own taste. Category III is quite different
(another notable example being Talossan, BTW). Here, the language is
Romance basically just because of its look-and-feel.
The difference is perhaps mostly visible in IB. Languages of category
I can be categorised internally as "Celto-Romance", "Slavo-Romance",
"Greco-Romance" etc., while languages of category II would rather
qualify as separate languages that do not belong to any sub-family at
all. Languages of category III would be extremely hard to quality as
real Romance languages at all, and if they are qualified anywhere,
it's just because of their look-and-feel.
Of course, a language would rather not exclusively belong to one
category only. Kerno, it seems, would primarily belong to category I,
but with a huge portion of III added to the mix. Correct me if I'm
wrong.
One major difference that involved languages of categories I and II
that is being disregarded here, is the question of the source
language. Is it Classical Latin (Jovian, Breathanach), Vulgar Latin
(Brithenig, Wenedyk), or perhaps some phase from the history of a
living romlang, let's see Old French, in which case the language
would rather be a con-dialect.
Categorising romlangs: yummy!
Jan
__________
"The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be
born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future
or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain."
� G'Kar quoting G'Quon, Babylon 5
http://steen.free.fr/
_________________________________________________________
Alt i �n. F� Yahoo! Mail med adressekartotek, kalender og
notisblokk. http://no.mail.yahoo.com