linguistics knowledge requirement question

[Mario Lord]

Hey again all, been a while since I was last here but I decided to come back for a visit at least. My question for you guys is; roughly how long it took you guys to learn the minimum amount of stuff about linguistics to be able to make a proper conlang?

..You see i'v made a few 'conlangs' and posted 2-3 of em here but I notice they are perhaps not on the same level as you guys's hehe. Mine have always simply been making a collection of words, pronunciations for each letter, and an alphabet & orthography. Whenever I look at the other conlangs on this site I see they are a lot more advanced with all sorts of linguistic terminology here and there which I have no experience with, all sorts of special phonological curiosities and whatnot, so I'm wondering how long it'd take me to become familiar with all this terminology and skills you all have so that I too could make like a proper conlang. Also what things I would have to learn, like I don't exactly have the time/will to do an entire linguistics degree lol. Thanks in advance for replies

[Micamo]

There's no such thing as a "proper conlang." If there is, then nobody in the history of humanity has ever made one. The linguistics knowledge you require is howevermuch you need before your work begins to meet or exceed your own standards, which only you can set.

[sangi39]

There's no such thing as a "proper conlang." If there is, then nobody in the history of humanity has ever made one. The linguistics knowledge you require is howevermuch you need before your work begins to meet or exceed your own standards, which only you can set.

I'm kind of with Micamo on this. The level of knowledge you "require" is basically the same as what level of your conlang you're working on, and even then it could be incomplete. For example, if you say that your conlang marks the subject with suffix -A and the object with suffix -B, then that's a degree of morphosyntactic alignment covered. You don't need to know about ergative-absolute alignment or tripartite alignment to come to that decision and you don't need to know everything about it to explain the situation present in your conlang.

More or less, I think all you really need is examples from natlangs, or even just imagination. The more you see, the more inspiration you'll have and the more you work on the conlang, the more you'll read and the more it will grow. What knowledge you gain as a result is just down to the direction you take.

[Lambuzhao]

Hey again all, been a while since I was last here but I decided to come back for a visit at least. My question for you guys is; roughly how long it took you guys to learn the minimum amount of stuff about linguistics to be able to make a proper conlang?

..You see i'v made a few 'conlangs' and posted 2-3 of em here but I notice they are perhaps not on the same level as you guys's hehe. Mine have always simply been making a collection of words, pronunciations for each letter, and an alphabet & orthography. Whenever I look at the other conlangs on this site I see they are a lot more advanced with all sorts of linguistic terminology here and there which I have no experience with, all sorts of special phonological curiosities and whatnot, so I'm wondering how long it'd take me to become familiar with all this terminology and skills you all have so that I too could make like a proper conlang. Also what things I would have to learn, like I don't exactly have the time/will to do an entire linguistics degree lol. Thanks in advance for replies

When I learned Latin, I learned a bunch of grammatical/linguistic/philological argot, which informed my conlanging some. But I already knew pretty much what I was doing before I knew things like SOV, VSO, syntax, verbal aspect, adjectival Orderings, etc. came into my growing sphere of knowledge. I just figured one day I'd learn the proper name for it... or invent one.

What is a proper conlang, exactly?


Even bad conlangs are conlangs nonetheless.

[elemtilas]

There's no such thing as a "proper conlang." If there is, then nobody in the history of humanity has ever made one. The linguistics knowledge you require is howevermuch you need before your work begins to meet or exceed your own standards, which only you can set.

Right! There's also no such thing as the "minimum amount" of linguistatical stuff you need to learn beforehand. This notion that somehow an invented language can only be made well by a linguist (or a near lingsuitanical layman) is terribly irksome. Some of the awesomest stuff out there is made by kids and (linguistically) naive folks who can't really tell an appendix from a participle. And wouldn't know how to conjugate either one if asked!


As for what other folks are doing and all their jargon, that does indeed come from either passive absorption or active learning of the linguistics jargon (and often the understanding of concepts that goes with!). There is no course syllabus and no set schedule for this kind of learning. Some people learn a lot & fast, other people don't pay much mind or learn a lot less & slower.


A long weekend or three and a good cuddle up with some basic Wikipedia articles or Linguistics for Dummies or even a good historical grammar of your favorite ancient language will get you up to speed with of the jargon that gets thrown around.

[Mario Lord]

Thanks for the replies guys, well I cant say I disagree lol, I always thought that a conlang doesn't need to be a good one to still be a conlang so yeah. Well I suppose it's relieving that you don't have to be like a linguistics professor or anything to do this, would be no fun if that were true. I'll continue having fun with it from time to time then I guess. Though do you guys also find it sometimes hard to muster the will to do some wordbuilding? My latest conlang I'm having some trouble deciding on an alphabet that I like so its especially hard to wordbuild cos I realise i'll have to change the letters around eventually, heh

[elemtilas]

Though do you guys also find it sometimes hard to muster the will to do some wordbuilding? My latest conlang I'm having some trouble deciding on an alphabet that I like so its especially hard to wordbuild cos I realise i'll have to change the letters around eventually, heh

One possible solution: let your mind wander into the world where this conlang is spoken and let the words wash over you. When you've heard (and written down!) a bunch, sort out the phonology of the language based on that sample, and then work on the alphabet. Anecdotally, I've noticed that very many, and especially beginner, conlangers here have so much trouble making words -- to say nothing of grammar or simple sentences or complex poetry -- simply because they get themselves caught in the trap of worrying over choosing the perfect phonology.

At the beginning, I certainly understand the desire to make a firm decision upon the sounds and letters -- there's nothing like working on a language for years only to later decide to revamp the whole phonology! Yet some folks do just this kind of thing.

As for finding the will, yeah I have trouble when it comes to tackling a long list of words. For me that's absolute tediosity! I prefer thinking about a text and finding the missing words as they become needed. Just one way of many of doing this!

[Ælfwine]

I've been learning Old Norse linguistics for about a year and I still don't know everything, although admittingly much of my earlier time was spent trying to learn the IPA. Just keep reading as much as possible and gaining knowledge through experience, over time it'll definitely start to show.

[Mario Lord]

@elemtilas:
Well typically I find the phonology, or for me just the general sound, of a language to be the beginning point for the language. I usually decide on an alphabet later, so I've already got the idea for what I want the words to sound like (though i usually dont know wat the language itself will sound like at the end). How do you usually make your langs?

@Ælfwine:
Well dat sounds like a nice plan, I'll try that. Also I love Old Norse, its probably my favourite language. One of my conlangs is sorta inspired by it hehe, the first one I posted here as well.

[KaiTheHomoSapien]

My first conlang attempts were around age 12 or so and they were more or less just imitating Latin. After that I started reading more about other languages and reading linguistic texts for fun, and now I feel like my conlang would be fairly advanced (I'm 16 now).

It seems like a lot of people get really into phonology, but that was never my primary interest. I've always been more interested in morphology, reading about cases, conjugations, tenses, moods, etc. Reading grammars of Latin, Ancient Greek, Sanskrit, Japanese, and other languages helped me understand that (and other facets of linguistics) a lot better. For me it was about wanting to understands the concepts I was using better. Yeah, my earliest conlang had a "dative case", but I didn't really know what that meant, at least not completely. It was only after studying the semantics and syntax of it that I realized what I was doing by having a "dative case" and that I didn't just have to copy Latin.

When I get to college I'll be majoring in linguistics, so by then my conlang should be super polished :D

[elemtilas]

@elemtilas:
Well typically I find the phonology, or for me just the general sound, of a language to be the beginning point for the language. I usually decide on an alphabet later, so I've already got the idea for what I want the words to sound like (though i usually dont know wat the language itself will sound like at the end).

No worries! There's certainly no One Right Way to do this! When you said you were having trouble with deciding on an alphabet, I wasn't sure if you meant the actual letters / symbols, or if you meant the sounds represented. Should have clarified before, I guess! I was only hoping you weren't getting stuck in that quagmire of inability to settle on the sounds of the language!

How do you usually make your langs?

I will usually start with a short snippet of a story or snatch of song or something like that. Striking that iron with the flint of a conception of what the language is like will generally spark an inspiration that reveals a new language pretty quick. Talarian got started with a short text about a foreign man riding a horse. Within about five minutes, I already knew it was postposing, having a topic/focus distinction, an archaic grammatical structure and wouldn't quite be IE in nature. The phonology, prosody and so forth came along as I listened to it. An understanding of the culture and religion(s) soon followed.

On the other hand, Queranaran got started with a single word ages ago, and then went underground for some decades only to pop up again maybe 15 years ago. Then, a couple short texts, one a Daine mother's prayer and another an inscription from a border-stone up in the hill country. The words came easier than the grammar, which didn't become clear(er) until much more recently.

Avantimannish got started with a number of nominal and pronominal paradigms years ago, and then a couple Aesop fables and a folk tale. The grammar is pretty much a done deal, but I have not yet settled the phonological details or history.

Mentolatian got started with an old medical-philosophical logion. Still haven't sorted that language out much!

In my experience, there are two basic kinds of glossopoets: the ones who make languages and the ones who find languages. I'm sure some folks will say this is but a psychological conceit of a kind, but I rather believe deep down in the old maxim of Michelangelo "Every block of stone has a statue inside it and it is the task of the sculptor to discover it." I see it as the glossopoet's art to discover the languages hidden in the lands of story and imagination. I have never been able to sit down and make a language; but letting one happen, that's a different story!

[Lambuzhao]

very many, and especially beginner, conlangers here have so much trouble making words -- to say nothing of grammar or simple sentences or complex poetry -- simply because they get themselves caught in the trap of worrying over choosing the perfect phonology.

To me, Phonological Inventory is like a glass menagerie... pretty, but that I am just not into. One can showcase it all they want, but gimme words, gimme utterances, gimme inscriptions rife with lacunae: gimme the language chock-a-block in its natural habitat. Mebbe I'm old-school in that regard.

At the beginning, I certainly understand the desire to make a firm decision upon the sounds and letters -- there's nothing like working on a language for years only to later decide to revamp the whole phonology!

I make some important considerations regarding phonology during the first violent glossopoetic birthpangs. Don't doubt it. Yet, for me, the phonology changes over time. Period. And I have some conlangs with pretty conservative phonologies. Yet changes happen. Just like with natlangs.

I'm prolly going to unfriend myself with a bunch of folks here for saying this, but, for me, I really really really don't sweat artificing the Rube Goldberg perfectly interlocking mousetrap of a phonological inventory... meh.

[clawgrip]

I'll unfriend you as soon as I figure out what in the world you're talking about. But I agree, a phonology chart etc. is to sample vocabulary what a baseball rulebook is to actually playing baseball.

[Trebor]

If you'd like to create more developed conlangs, I'd suggest the following:

• perusing Mark Rosenfelder's (Zompist) 'Language Construction Kit' and Pablo David Flores's 'How to Create a Language';
• listening to the Conlangery podcast;
• looking at descriptions, full or partial, of natural languages and crosslinguistic examinations of phonological, morphological, syntactic, and syntactic features/issues; and
• reading threads at the Zompist Bulletin Board and this very website.

[Keenir]

I'm prolly going to unfriend myself with a bunch of folks here for saying this, but, for me, I really really really don't sweat artificing the Rube Goldberg perfectly interlocking mousetrap of a phonological inventory... meh.

I'll unfriend you as soon as I figure out what in the world you're talking about. But I agree, a phonology chart etc. is to sample vocabulary what a baseball rulebook is to actually playing baseball.

*nods to both* I've seen people try to hold so closely to the rulebook (mostly for golf, but I don't doubt it happens in other sports) that they either can't or won't play the sport: they've terrified themselves or straightjacketed themselves into a corner.

[clawgrip]

I had read and absorbed every treatise and textbook on the subject, and felt myself well prepared for the experience. Yet, when I finally played poker, I discovered that the reality bore little resemblance to the rules.

in other words, Bahasa yan dijadikan sebagai bahasa sumberu adarafu Bahasa Inggurisu dan sebagai bahasa sasaran adarafu Bahasa Bataku Toba falls well within the range of Japanese phonotactics, yet is obviuosly not Japanese at all. So, real examples, please!

[Creyeditor]

Spoiler:

Bahasa yan[g] dijadikan sebagai bahasa sumber[...] ada[lah][...] Bahasa Ingg[...]ris[...] dan sebagai bahasa sasaran ada[lah][rafu] Bahasa Batak[...] Toba
bahasa yang di-jadi-kan se-bagai bahasa sumber ada Bahasa Inggris dan se-bagai
language REL PASS-become-CAUS INDEF-like language source COP language English and INDEF-like language target COP language Batak Toba
The language that was used as the source language was English and (the language that was used as) as the target language was Toba Batak.

Fascinating

For me the distinction is more between static inventories and dynamic processes. Seeing examples for an inventory is less exciting than seeing examples for a process IMO.

[clawgrip]

Even after I adapted it to Japanese phonology it still doesn't look at all Japanese.

[elemtilas]

very many, and especially beginner, conlangers here have so much trouble making words -- to say nothing of grammar or simple sentences or complex poetry -- simply because they get themselves caught in the trap of worrying over choosing the perfect phonology.

To me, Phonological Inventory is like a glass menagerie... pretty, but that I am just not into. One can showcase it all they want, but gimme words, gimme utterances, gimme inscriptions rife with lacunae: gimme the language chock-a-block in its natural habitat. Mebbe I'm old-school in that regard.

Perhaps. Or a tadge impatient with the "oo, i've been conlanging for-freaking-ever. Yeah I started last week, but then didn't do anything with it for a long time but then i created 19 conlangs today, but 18 and a half of them I only got as far as consonants (well, stops mainly), which I'll probably change 42 times over the course of the next fortnight and the 19th one I still can't decide between isolating yet radically polysynthetic vs oo something with spaghetti in please! Wait, what were we talking about?" crowd.

We were all there at some point in time in that oh so distant past!

That time when we just didn't have the words, the chock-a-block or any kind of natural habitat worth showing off! I guess they just need the time to grow and learn the craft too. And time for their conlangs to finally age a bit beyond the babbling stage.

At the beginning, I certainly understand the desire to make a firm decision upon the sounds and letters -- there's nothing like working on a language for years only to later decide to revamp the whole phonology!

I make some important considerations regarding phonology during the first violent glossopoetic birthpangs. Don't doubt it. Yet, for me, the phonology changes over time. Period. And I have some conlangs with pretty conservative phonologies. Yet changes happen. Just like with natlangs.

Sure. Some of the changes are quite natural. Others are more along the lines of "oh, what the hell was i thinking there!? Aw, sheets and blankets, you mean I've got to schlep through a ten thousand word lexicon and a hundred pages of grammar two websites, a blog and who knows how many translation exercises, texts, stories and songs to change all those spellings!?!?

I'm prolly going to unfriend myself with a bunch of folks here for saying this, but, for me, I really really really don't sweat artificing the Rube Goldberg perfectly interlocking mousetrap of a phonological inventory... meh.

Sir, I believe we shall be in that same good ship!

I can honestly say I haven't yet come up with a single Goldbergian phonological inventory for any invented language yet...





Oh, well...

Much easier to write stories and poems and folktales than worry about what they sound like in the mouths of people that aren't even anatomically identical to us anyway!

[Khemehekis]

I recommend going to the CBB census thread:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4725

and reading the grammars there!