[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
--- On Sat, 1/16/10, Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@hidden.email> wrote: On 2010-01-16 Padraic Brown wrote: >> > To get it right you need a >> > >good dictionary and preferably Meyer-Lübke's >> > >"Romanisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch. >> >> It could be argued that such a prescriptive attitude has >> its place (such as in quasi-historical language >> (re)creation) but is not necessarily applicable to all >> conlanging endeavours. > >Note what went before: > >> For languages set in other >> >areas such a merger would be unrealistic Understood -- though this seems to have been said in the context of location (i.e., North Africa, vs. other places' VLs). I certainly agree that giving North African sound changes to any other form of VL would indeed be "unrealistic"! Though it might be entirely appropriate for the conlang in question! I also understand that to be a prescriptive "do this, not that" sort of attitude and will feel free to follow it or set it aside as the spirit moves me. :) >Apologies. Of course I was only speaking of how to >proceed *if* one wants realism. Agreed. Though, again, it will depend on how you mean "realism" here. Do you mean "realistic" as in correct by the book on Vulgar Latin? Or do you mean "realistic" as in not artifical sounding, simulating the *life* within a VL dialect, but not necessarily being a direct descendant or close relative? To me, Brithenig sounds "realistic" on account of the careful application of sound changes. It sounds more or less like Welsh (or rather, what Welsh would sound like as spoken by a bunch of Latins who haven't had proper schoolmasters for 1500 years). But Teonaht sounds "realistic" on account of its organic, living qualities. It doesn't follow the book on VL (or any other) sound changes. > Perhaps I should have hedged better, and written "to get this aspect >realistic" rather than >"to get it right". I confess the slip to be due to myself >normally striving for realism or at least naturalism. Fair enough! There is certainly room for both, and many more approaches. After all, in the visual arts, we have both photography and surrealism! >I thought my opening comments would have made clear that >I don't prescribe realism, or to put it otherwise: it is not >required to get my approval, but usually helps to arouse >my interest. We each have our own particular interests, and those things that will get our attention. Sorry if the claws came out a little premature! > So yes I have a taste but I don't prescribe >it for others. I don't eat broccoli myself either, but >would of course not try to stop others from eating it; >neither, however, would I be likely to share recepies >for it, much preferring tomatoes! Alright then! Do you have a favorite tomato preparation or recipe? Me, I like to some tomato slices and eat em with catsup. Most everyone I've encountered thinks it's weird, but it's pretty tasty. >/BP 8^)> Padraic