[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
--- Mark J. Reed skrzypszy:
> > Thanks Henrik, I think your auxlangs look great. What
> > languages did you use to develop these auxlangs?
My first thought when I saw this: OUCH! ;)
> This mailing list is explicitly not about auxlangs.
That is not entirely true. Romance auxlangs are as much on-topic as Romance artlangs, but only as far as the Romance character of these languages are concerned. This is definitely not the place for auxlang advocacy, and discussions of the type "Esperanto sux, Europanto rulez" are to be avoided. So feel free to display your Romance auxlang and/or to ask for suggestions, but don't try to convince anybody that it's better than other languages, because that's not what we are for.
> The languages Henrik gave examples of are what we call
> "artlangs" - constructed languages with no political agenda.
Quite so. Most of them (especially Brithenig, Thrótrunn and Wenedyk) are examples of so-called "alternative languages" (altlangs): hyper-naturalistic languages that cóuld have emerged if history had been different.
> A third category is "engelang", [...] such languages are
> rarely Romance-based, however, and so unlikely to crop up on this
> mailing list.
Indeed. Has something like a Romance-based or Romance-inspired engelang ever been created or discussed? I know of one language, Ceqli, that is Germanic-based, but I'm unaware of a Romance equivalent.
(For some strange reason, the name "Romlan" comes to mind)
Altlangs like Brithenig and Wenedyk can, to some degree, also be considered engelangs, because they adhere to some pretty rigid design criteria that often overshadow the artistic element.
Jan
__________________________________________________________
Not happy with your email address?.
Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html