A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

What can I say? It doesn't fit above, put it here. Also the location of board rules/info.
Khemehekis
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2133
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 08:36
Location: California über alles

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Khemehekis » Thu 29 Mar 2012, 13:06

Hmmmmmm . . .

Derived: Brithenig, Wenedyk
Mixed: Talossan, Verdurian, O'ld T'ongue
Earthly: Quenya, Sindarin, Siua, Itlani, Inyauk, Kankonian, Alurhsa, Teonaht, Tokana/Okuna, Noyatowah, Kesh, Arka
Alien: Kelen, Hapoish, Dritok, Q^upl (sp?), Cispa
Regional: Folkspraak, Slovio, Slovianski, Afrihili
International: Esperanto, Glosa, Lingua Franca Nova, Solresol, SASXSEK, Frater, Ido, Interlingua, Novial, Volapu:k
Logical: Lojban, Loglan, Ceqli, Gua!spi
Philosophical: Laa'dan, Ro, Silarg, Toki Pona, Ithkuil

???: Na'vi, aUI, Classical Yiklamu, Agyonnar, Lingua Ignota
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 57,500 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
User avatar
Ànradh
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2100
Joined: Thu 28 Jul 2011, 02:57
Location: Cumbernauld, Scotland

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Ànradh » Thu 29 Mar 2012, 13:25

Hmm, well by Aszev's map, both mine are EFL. No real supprise there.
Sin ar Pàrras agus nì sinne mar a thogras sinn. Choisinn sinn e agus ’s urrainn dhuinn ga loisgeadh.
User avatar
M. Park
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 131
Joined: Sat 28 Jan 2012, 19:12

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by M. Park » Fri 30 Mar 2012, 03:48

Would languages isolated only to a religion, or set of them, fall under philosophical?
User avatar
Aszev
admin
admin
Posts: 1501
Joined: Tue 11 May 2010, 04:46
Location: Upp.
Contact:

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Aszev » Fri 30 Mar 2012, 16:51

M. Park wrote:Would languages isolated only to a religion, or set of them, fall under philosophical?
Not if it's a completely "normal" language otherwise, that just happens to be liturgical or so.
Sound change works in mysterious ways.

Image CE
Khemehekis
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2133
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 08:36
Location: California über alles

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Khemehekis » Wed 04 Apr 2012, 13:39

Aszev wrote:
M. Park wrote:Would languages isolated only to a religion, or set of them, fall under philosophical?
Not if it's a completely "normal" language otherwise, that just happens to be liturgical or so.
Where would you place Hildegarde's Lingua Ignota?
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 57,500 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6159
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by eldin raigmore » Thu 05 Apr 2012, 00:56

Khemehekis wrote:Where would you place Hildegarde's Lingua Ignota?
It was an idiolang or an autolang or a private 'lang or a "heartlang".
User avatar
Aszev
admin
admin
Posts: 1501
Joined: Tue 11 May 2010, 04:46
Location: Upp.
Contact:

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Aszev » Thu 05 Apr 2012, 12:28

I'd say Verdurian, Na'vi and Old Tongue are EFL, at least the 2 former, I can't say I've bothered to look into OT a lot.

Lingua Ignota is a good question, the intent is not clear, and there isn't really much to go on. From what I can tell there seems to be only a wordlist, and then the words are used together with Latin? Would that even be a proper conlang and not just a cypher?
Sound change works in mysterious ways.

Image CE
User avatar
Ear of the Sphinx
metal
metal
Posts: 1987
Joined: Mon 23 Aug 2010, 00:41
Location: Nose of the Sun

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Ear of the Sphinx » Thu 05 Apr 2012, 13:49

Aszev, Kheme, your classifications will be very helpful for me. Thanks. :-)

Also, I think linguistical experiments can be included within PELs, and programming languages (!) within LELs.

Image
Thrice the brinded cat hath mew'd.
User avatar
lsd
roman
roman
Posts: 886
Joined: Fri 11 Mar 2011, 21:11
Contact:

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by lsd » Thu 05 Apr 2012, 21:34

I can understand the opposition between a priori and a posteriori but the opposition between naturalistic and engineered, i dunno
It mixes construction and purpose no?
For example many LAI are engineered as a posteriori or even naturalistic language (LAI<=>DPL)
User avatar
Ear of the Sphinx
metal
metal
Posts: 1987
Joined: Mon 23 Aug 2010, 00:41
Location: Nose of the Sun

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Ear of the Sphinx » Thu 05 Apr 2012, 23:27

Naturalistic-artistic, meaning that they're supposed to work like natural languages, with their illogicalities, inconsequences, irregularities and other thing that are ruled out of the engineered languages.
Thrice the brinded cat hath mew'd.
User avatar
lsd
roman
roman
Posts: 886
Joined: Fri 11 Mar 2011, 21:11
Contact:

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by lsd » Fri 06 Apr 2012, 21:30

"Naturalistic" is a subdivision of "a posteriori" and "engineered" is a peculiar case of "a priori". Fictional are often with a posteriori structures, usage of imaginary roots does not make them a priori (cf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_priori_and_a_posteriori ) but can be totally a posteriori. LAI can be naturalistic (ido,...) or using imaginary roots (kotava,...),...etc
Khemehekis
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2133
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 08:36
Location: California über alles

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Khemehekis » Sat 07 Apr 2012, 00:55

Aszev wrote:I'd say Verdurian, Na'vi and Old Tongue are EFL, at least the 2 former, I can't say I've bothered to look into OT a lot.

Lingua Ignota is a good question, the intent is not clear, and there isn't really much to go on. From what I can tell there seems to be only a wordlist, and then the words are used together with Latin? Would that even be a proper conlang and not just a cypher?
Your estimation of Na'vi sounds about right, although has the grammar been made public yet?

As for Verdurian, a lot of the lexicon -- too much to be explained away by coincidence -- is lifted directly from Romance languages. (There are also some deliberate borrowings from German, Russian and Greek.) I put it under "Mixed" because there is no actual diachronic relation to Latin, etc.; rather, Mark Rosenfelder retroengineered the Romance-sounding words into Cadhinorian forms that would evolve by regular sound changes into Verdurian.

From what I've read about Old Tongue (dodging lawsuits because I've never actually read Robert Jordan's books), he stole words from Norse (and some other language -- was it Quenya?) and meshed them together with no coherent grammar, throwing in a bunch of apostrophes.

And as for Lingua Ignota, it's often called the first known conlang ever, so most conlangers seem to regard it as a conlang. It could quite possibly be a cipher, though . . .
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 57,500 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
Tanni
greek
greek
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 01:05

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Tanni » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 14:32

Khemehekis wrote:
Thu 29 Mar 2012, 13:06
Hmmmmmm . . .

Logical: Lojban, Loglan, Ceqli, Gua!spi
I by chance have found something interesting on Loglan:
Listen here at 45:18.

It seems that "testing a hypothesis" was not the original purpose of Loglan.
My neurochemistry has fucked my impulse control, now I'm diagnosed OOD = oppositional opinion disorder, one of the most deadly diseases in totalitarian states, but can be cured in the free world.
User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6159
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by eldin raigmore » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 15:07

Ear of the Sphinx wrote:
Thu 05 Apr 2012, 23:27
Naturalistic-artistic, meaning that they're supposed to work like natural languages, with their illogicalities, inconsequences, irregularities and other thing that are ruled out of the engineered languages.
lsd wrote:
Fri 06 Apr 2012, 21:30
"Naturalistic" is a subdivision of "a posteriori" and "engineered" is a peculiar case of "a priori". Fictional are often with a posteriori structures, usage of imaginary roots does not make them a priori (cf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_priori_and_a_posteriori ) but can be totally a posteriori. LAI can be naturalistic (ido,...) or using imaginary roots (kotava,...),...etc
I don’t think either of those is true.
A con Lang can be deliberately engineered to seem naturalistic.
Also, “a posteriori” conlangs are each designed to seem as if descendants or relatives of one or two specific natlangs.
“Naturalistic” conlangs are just supposed each to generically resemble all natural languages or a large group of them.

———

The taxonomy discussed in this thread, appears, at least superficially or at first blush, to be highly Anglophone-specific.

The German word for conlang — kunstsprache (or something similar) — if glossed literally would appear to be a claque of “artlang”. (A better translation would be “artificial language”, rather than “artistic language”.)

The Esperanto term — planlingvo — appears to mean planned language or designed language; it connotes, to me, engineered languages.

——

A truly useful taxonomy would be the same (possibly modulo term-for-term translations) regardless of the metalanguage in which we were discussing the conlangs.

IMHO. If we want to discuss conlangs scientifically.
User avatar
Ahzoh
korean
korean
Posts: 6149
Joined: Sun 20 Oct 2013, 01:57
Location: Toma-ʾEzra lit Vṛḵaža

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Ahzoh » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 16:00

^Do it all in Latin
Vrkhazhian - To explore triconsonantalism and for the aesthetic of a language spoken by a desert culture
Onschen - http://www.aveneca.com/cbb/viewtopic.ph ... 59#p249659
Image Ӯсцӣ (Onschen) [ CWS ]
Image Šat Vṛḵažaẇ (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]
Tanni
greek
greek
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 01:05

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Tanni » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 16:41

eldin raigmore wrote:
Fri 10 Aug 2018, 15:07
The German word for conlang — kunstsprache (or something similar) — if glossed literally would appear to be a claque of “artlang”. (A better translation would be “artificial language”, rather than “artistic language”.)

The Esperanto term — planlingvo — appears to mean planned language or designed language; it connotes, to me, engineered languages.
The original German word for conlang was "Plansprache", planned language, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plansprache. I always wondered why other Germans on this board use the term "Kunstsprache", which redirects to Esperanto.
Wikipedia wrote:Der Begriff „Plansprache“ geht auf den österreichischen Terminologiewissenschaftler Eugen Wüster zurück. Es gibt eine Vielzahl an Bezeichnungen für Plansprachen (auch: geplante Sprachen), wobei die Bezeichnungen teilweise eine andere Definition erfordern.
The term "Plansprache" traces back to the Austrian terminology scientist Eugen Wüster. There are a multitude of terms for Plansprachen (also: geplante Sprachen), where the terms in part need another definition. I for myself use the term "conlang" even in German. I never heard of "Kunstsprache" in real life.

Liste von Plansprachen=list of planned languages.

There is also the term "Konstruierte Sprache", which just translates to "constructed language". "Plansprachen" are a subgroup of "Konstruierte Sprachen", which are intended for human communication.
My neurochemistry has fucked my impulse control, now I'm diagnosed OOD = oppositional opinion disorder, one of the most deadly diseases in totalitarian states, but can be cured in the free world.
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3169
Joined: Sat 22 Nov 2014, 04:48

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by elemtilas » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 16:53

eldin raigmore wrote:
Fri 10 Aug 2018, 15:07
Ear of the Sphinx wrote:
Thu 05 Apr 2012, 23:27
Naturalistic-artistic, meaning that they're supposed to work like natural languages, with their illogicalities, inconsequences, irregularities and other thing that are ruled out of the engineered languages.
lsd wrote:
Fri 06 Apr 2012, 21:30
"Naturalistic" is a subdivision of "a posteriori" and "engineered" is a peculiar case of "a priori". Fictional are often with a posteriori structures, usage of imaginary roots does not make them a priori (cf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_priori_and_a_posteriori ) but can be totally a posteriori. LAI can be naturalistic (ido,...) or using imaginary roots (kotava,...),...etc
I don’t think either of those is true.
A con Lang can be deliberately engineered to seem naturalistic.
Naturally. I don't think, for taxonomic purposes, this would exclude such an invented language from the "naturalistic" slot. I know the whole taxonomy thing is a bit arbitrary and subjective: I'd look to the broadest possible interpretation of a language and exclude it immediately, drilling down to the narrowest and accepting that as the answer.

For example, Sindarin is clearly, for some definition of the word "engineered". But so are Klingon and Teonaht and Britainese and Wenedyk and Ygyde. "Engineered" in this sense of the word is near enough to a synonym for "invented" or "constructed" or "designed" that, at least in my opinion, makes it a not very useful term.

So, removing "engineered", we're left with naturalistic, which I think is the slot such a language would fit into. This language would therefore be separated from the languages that are "engineered" to be thought experiments and those "engineered" to be for interlingsuitic communications. Thus, the three sides of the Gnoli Triangle: artistic / naturalistic languages; engineered languages; international auxiliary languages.
The taxonomy discussed in this thread, appears, at least superficially or at first blush, to be highly Anglophone-specific.
In what way? And also, which taxonomy? There are two that I can find: Khemehekis's and Aszev's. The former, though, is really a taxonomy of individual practice rather than of language type, so I'll hazard the guess you're really addressing Aszev's taxonomy.
The German word for conlang — kunstsprache (or something similar) — if glossed literally would appear to be a claque of “artlang”. (A better translation would be “artificial language”, rather than “artistic language”.)

The Esperanto term — planlingvo — appears to mean planned language or designed language; it connotes, to me, engineered languages.
I guess the solution here is for each active community who is also more philosophically inclined to devise its own taxonomy, then send representatives to some nice conference centre in, say, Bali where they can sort out similarities and differences and draw up a Report on the conference (written, naturally, in reconstructed Gaulish) and offer sensible translations into German & French and so forth of all the taxonomical bits.
A truly useful taxonomy would be the same (possibly modulo term-for-term translations) regardless of the metalanguage in which we were discussing the conlangs.
Agreed. Are you aware of any work along these lines among French or German (or Finnish or Russian) glossopoets? I've paid on-and-off attention to the long ago discussions on Conlang-L and was satisfied with the whole Gnoli Triangle thing. Simple to visualise, broadly expressive, and has a whole lot of space for placing hybrid languages.

I would hazard the guess that it would largely be a matter of finding the German or Spanish or E-o words that mean "artlang", "engelang" and "auxlang" at attach those to the Triangle.
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3169
Joined: Sat 22 Nov 2014, 04:48

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by elemtilas » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 17:17

Aszev wrote:
Thu 29 Mar 2012, 12:25
Here is a classification system I came up with a while ago while tinkering with these ideas:
Spoiler:
Image
Thoughts?
I realise you came up with this years ago, well before my time here, but now that the thread has been revitalised...

First, I'll state that I've long accepted the Gnoli Triangle as a rather good taxonomic scheme for invented languages. My thoughts will thus be (rather) biased in that direction, but I hope will not be taken as overly harsh or unconstructively critical.

Some thoughts:

The same issue I have with eldin's use of "engineered" as regards your auxiliary-experimental axis. All invented languages are, in some way or other, "engineered"; it can be taken as a near synonym for "constructed". But also, and more importantly, "Engineered Language" (engelang) already has a long standing meaning and usage (dating to 2001) which your "experimental" axis falls under. In my opinion, an auxiliary language is not an engineered language the way a philosophical language is.

All invented languages are "fictional", so your "fictional" slot is kind of tautological for every other slot in the scheme. But of course, "fictional" also has a literary meaning, but its unclear if you intend this to be a category specific to "invented languages used in literature" or something else. Also, all "a posteriori" invented languages are by definition "fictional" so I am doubly unsure why there are two axes in the naturalistic category. Lastly, it seems kind of strange to place "alien languages that violate human language universals" under the "naturalistic designed to work like a human language" category. [;)]

Those are the main points that stick out for me. I think if I say anything further, I'll simply end up reinventing the Triangle!, so I'll leave it at that. But I would ask: have you done any reworking of this scheme since 2012?
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera
User avatar
Pabappa
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat 18 Nov 2017, 02:41
Contact:

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Pabappa » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 18:59

I think he used the word fictional so that it would spell a different acronym than a posteriori. . I would normally refer to languages under that branch as a priori.

All of my conlangs are AFL, because there's always something weird about each of them. However, some of my minor works are closer to normality to serve as a backdrop for the others. Pabappa wouldn't be the same to me if all of the other languages on the planet also sounded that way.

I'd argue the whole second tree could be interpreted as a subbranch off AFL, or possibly of the other three A's as well, with the differences being the purpose rather than the design. If we did that, the two top layers would disappear, and third layer (p vs f) would become the first branch. The acronyms would be one letter longer because the tree would be one layer taller. However, L is redundant so the same 3 letter acronym style would still work.
÷÷÷÷÷÷
I just looked up the Gnoli triangle. I like that it offers degrees. But I don't make auxlangs, and I have only a few engelang traits, so all of my conlangs fit in the corner. Also the Gnoli triangle offers no distinction between a priori vs a posteriori , perhaps because it isn't a matter of several degrees ?
Image
User avatar
Reyzadren
sinic
sinic
Posts: 326
Joined: Sun 14 May 2017, 09:39
Contact:

Re: A Taxonomy of Conlanging (help me out)

Post by Reyzadren » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 22:54

griuskant: I wanted a language that has all the features that I want. None of the conlangs have them, and natlangs are too difficult for me. This conlang is so easy that even lesser me who ineptly learn foreign languages can master it. Also, ic-ly, it is a language in my conworld. As I consider myself more of a conworlder than conlanger, it's actually great to be able to use not-English to be inter-authentic towards the settings.

With regards to taxonomy, none of the proposed classification schemes in this thread is able to categorise griuskant appropriately. The simplest suggestion for this imo, is to just label it as a conworld language, or even just use the fictional language box.
Image Soundcloud Profile | Image griuskant conlang
Post Reply