Re: A proposal to bring together the conlang communities

Hallo!

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 00:34:09 +0100, Henrik Theiling wrote:

> Hi!
>
> Jörg Rhiemeier writes:
> >...
> > The CONLANG list is much nicer, even if I feel that it has been
> > rather quiet and leaning towards engelanger dominance lately.
> >...
>
> I really hope I haven't posted too wildly about my own engelangs here
> -- I do like to compare them to other people's concepts! :-)  But I
> must also say that I do not see this movement as we have seen many
> conlang concepts here that are not engelangs.
Sure, not all the conlangs discussed here recently are engelangs.
Indeed, most are artlangs, though some have an unnatural, "engelangy"
feel to them.

> My own development was definitely away from engelangs, Þrjótrunn being
> quite the opposite.
Sure.  Þrjótrunn is not an engelang by any stretch of imagination.
It is an artlang, and actually a rather well-done naturalistic one.
Actually, I'd say that *all* your conlangs are artlangs even if
some of them feel engelangy to me.  The naturalistic school is
certainly neither the only nor the only legitimate school of
artlanging.

> Taking the calculated risk of being bashed now by Jörg: even my
> Terkunan is not an engelang. :-P
I'm not going to bash you - Terkunan is certainly not an engelang,
I have never seen it as such.  I have always considered it an artlang.
But I have said what I had to say about it.

... brought to you by the Weeping Elf