(Sorry! This thread has been moved! Please read why and follow the link. )

[alice]

Bob reminds me a lot of Serali: I'm sure he's done something of interest and/or value; he just seems remarkably reluctant to present it in a way which is concise and readly appreciated.

[Raphael]

I guess the "problem", so to say, is that 1) Bob is pretty weird, but 2) conlanging is an inherently weird interest, so pretty much everyone here is to some extent weird, so 3) people here aren't sure how to handle or approach someone who has an "additional" weirdness on top of the "basic" weirdness of all of us here.

[Bob]

...

[bradrn]

If anyone's interested in this post, I just today did two new ones that are less about me talking about what's going on and more about me giving actual examples, and not just links, to huge interlinear glossed texts! Only one explains the glosses in standardized scientific terms but the other gives a link to a very concise grammatical outline which would clarify most curiosity.

You’re talking about this and this, right? If so, those are already looking much better and a lot more readable, although I’ll have to look through them properly first.

[zompist]

I guess the "problem", so to say, is that 1) Bob is pretty weird, but 2) conlanging is an inherently weird interest, so pretty much everyone here is to some extent weird, so 3) people here aren't sure how to handle or approach someone who has an "additional" weirdness on top of the "basic" weirdness of all of us here.

That is, I'm afraid, a pretty good summary.

I'm going to ask Bob to tone it down, but I want to ask everyone else to as well. I know it's hard, because of (1) and (3) above. But, well, try to remember Bob reads your comments, and quite understandably gets hurt, and then complains to me, and what do I tell him?

Criticizing his work is fine, but maybe less criticism of Bob personally. I know his self-praise is grating, and that's specifically what I want Bob to tone down, but it doesn't have to be brought up constantly.

[masako]

Criticizing his work is fine

That's kinda the thing though...I don't see any of his work. I only see his attempts to rehash other people's work.

I think most of us here (just based on my humble opinion and very brief experience) would rather see original work from a member, something fresh, something novel, not really something that - while perfect on a blog - doesn't really jive with the typical work we see here. I am in no way suggesting that there isn't a place for his type of analysis, but given the norm here, I think the reactions to this particular flavor of weirdness have actually been fairly tame.

[bradrn]

I guess the "problem", so to say, is that 1) Bob is pretty weird, but 2) conlanging is an inherently weird interest, so pretty much everyone here is to some extent weird, so 3) people here aren't sure how to handle or approach someone who has an "additional" weirdness on top of the "basic" weirdness of all of us here.

… I'm going to ask Bob to tone it down …

It looks like some of his newer posts are better now.

Criticizing his work is fine

That's kinda the thing though...I don't see any of his work. I only see his attempts to rehash other people's work.

I think most of us here (just based on my humble opinion and very brief experience) would rather see original work from a member, something fresh, something novel, not really something that - while perfect on a blog - doesn't really jive with the typical work we see here. I am in no way suggesting that there isn't a place for his type of analysis, but given the norm here, I think the reactions to this particular flavor of weirdness have actually been fairly tame.

Maybe that’s a personal thing — I’m more than happy to see analyses of others’ work. (I even did some of this myself a while ago.)

[Imralu]

Did I miss another "This is the World's Best Conlang!" thread?

[Frislander]

If you want to properly develop an alternative to something, you have to understand it well enough that you can understand what is wrong with it. I don't think I would have such a solid anti-Chomskyan position in my theoretical persuasions if I hadn't been at a solidly Chomskyan university for three years because I wouldn't have been exposed comprehensively enough to its ideas to understand what I didn't like about them. Similarly it's no good creating an alternative to the IPA without first understanding it (and by extension phonetics in general) enough to see the flaws with it (the eurocentrism in some of the ways it chooses to mark particular contrasts and somewhat inconsistent usage of some of the forms in common usage by linguists).

Similarly, if you're going to go about saying that modern academia is inherently flawed in how it goes about seeking knowledge I'm not a priori opposed to that but you have to show that first you understand what there is that can be criticised and second the alternative you propose sufficiently addresses those concerns, and again I don't see that.

[masako]

Did I miss another "This is the World's Best Conlang!" thread?

It would seem so. We've all been toiling away for naught. We should immediately recognize our folly and join the cause.

[bradrn]

Did I miss another "This is the World's Best Conlang!" thread?

It would seem so. We've all been toiling away for naught. We should immediately recognize our folly and join the cause.

Why the sarcasm? Bob’s most recent threads (https://www.verduria.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=636 and https://www.verduria.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=635) seem to have a lot less of that stuff.

[Frislander]

Did I miss another "This is the World's Best Conlang!" thread?

It would seem so. We've all been toiling away for naught. We should immediately recognize our folly and join the cause.

Why the sarcasm? Bob’s most recent threads (https://www.verduria.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=636 and https://www.verduria.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=635) seem to have a lot less of that stuff.

Sure, the self-aggrandisement is somewhat toned down, but the spammy un-scholarly style itself remains fundamentally unchanged

[Bob]

Sorry for not replying earlier this week. The weather's been nice.

Vardelm » Fri Jun 05, 2020 9:16 am

Thanks for your response.

bradrn Post Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:09 am

Thanks for your response.

Vardelm Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:20 am

Pakuni is based on the Kwa Branch of Niger-Congo. Atlantean is based on PIE words and what's common in the grammars of all the languages of Earth.

elemtilas Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:35 pm

I don't go on your posts and criticize how you present yourself or see the world. But whatever.

dewrad Sat Jun 06, 2020 1:18 pm

I mark the words that I got out of the ETCSL glossary and Halloran "Sumerian Lexicon". Others I made up to save time and because I lack an English index for Halloran or an expanse of time to be on the internet in a given week. I use a simplified version of actual Sumerian grammar, based on the Cambridge Encyclopedia of the World's Ancient Languages and my own notes from Marie Thompson's grammar and some others.

elemtilas Sat Jun 06, 2020 2:32 pm

Ahhhh, I do what I can.

elemtilas Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:57 pm

I have made Pakuni into a great invented language. I would say Fromkin did a great job on it. But the way she made it, it was a simple thing. I've expanded it a lot.

I'm making a statement about the importance of educating children.

?. I remember what I wrote that you're responding to.

Ser Sat Jun 06, 2020 5:08 pm

zompist Sat Jun 06, 2020 5:33 pm

Okay.

I did this post originally where I just said what I wanted about what I've been doing.

And then there's all these people telling me to actually post something. So I added a bunch of links and then did some more posts with interlinear glossed examples of the languages.

But I don't really want to give them a bunch of examples if they're going to be so mean to me about all this and call me "tiresomely self-aggrandizing". I've worked hard and don't know who these people are.

People got to read between the lines. If they can't do that, I'm not going to meet them more than half way.

elemtilas Sat Jun 06, 2020 5:50 pm

Well, I'm trying to give you some satisfaction but if you could couch your language a bit more graciously, I think that would help you cause.

So you want the dictionary and grammar she made in 1995? Write me a private message and only give it to people who ask. I think I got it on a facebook group and can give you a copy. Most of it is in my links, which you totally misrepresent in your descriptions of them above.


bradrn Sat Jun 06, 2020 9:55 pm

Check the links, join my facebook groups, and private message me here or on facebook if you want help studying Pakuni or Atlantean or any other "famous conlang" from books tv or movies.

elemtilas Sun Jun 07, 2020 12:14 am

masako Sun Jun 07, 2020 7:56 am

bradrn Sun Jun 07, 2020 8:05 am

masako Sun Jun 07, 2020 8:26 am

Vardelm Sun Jun 07, 2020 9:30 am

bradrn Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:00 am

( I realize where my work is lacking and have read tons of academic articles by linguists. What these people are saying about my work and created transcription systems is tiresome. )

masako Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:55 am

Vardelm Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:59 am

bradrn Sun Jun 07, 2020 11:06 am

Vardelm Sun Jun 07, 2020 11:19 am

...

I read all the replies. I have a BA Linguistics from Michigan State University from 2009 with a 3.0 GPA. I have studied linguistics a lot on my own since then.

But I specialize in logographic writing systems. So there's some things about linguistics I'm not so good at.

That said, a lot of the comments above ... People who know about linguistics and about the study of exotic languages, they can tell when people know what they're doing and know what they're talking about. My links and posts speak for themselves. They're not all polished academic articles but I would say that each one of them is useful or interesting in their own way.

[Bob]

Sorry for moving the thread, I should have just deleted one part. Oh, it's hectic over here.

[elemtilas]

elemtilas Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:35 pm

I don't go on your posts and criticize how you present yourself or see the world. But whatever.

You don't do that, because I don't "present myself" and I only rarely reveal how I see the world. I show you my work. If you want to critivise it, fine; if you want to or don't want to comment, that's fine too.

The take away lesson is this: I would ignore much of your "presentation style" if you actually had the goods to back up the egoism. Respect is a thing earned, not a thing to be gotten by blowing your own trumpet.

elemtilas Sat Jun 06, 2020 2:32 pm

Ahhhh, I do what I can.

Have no idea what you're referring to.

elemtilas Sat Jun 06, 2020 4:57 pm

I have made Pakuni into a great invented language. I would say Fromkin did a great job on it. But the way she made it, it was a simple thing. I've expanded it a lot.

Possibly. Like I said elsewhere: it's your choice to make a fanlang, and more power to you! I read some of your translation work, and as I also said before, it's commendable to take mediocre raw materials and turn it into something that can handle Greek myth.

I'm making a statement about the importance of educating children.

?. I remember what I wrote that you're responding to.

Have no idea what you're referring to.

I did this post originally where I just said what I wanted about what I've been doing.

And then there's all these people telling me to actually post something. So I added a bunch of links and then did some more posts with interlinear glossed examples of the languages.

And that addition was appreciated. It doesn't make sense to say I've been doing X Y & Z without showing what X Y & Z actually are. It's like show and tell without the show.

But I don't really want to give them a bunch of examples if they're going to be so mean to me about all this and call me "tiresomely self-aggrandizing". I've worked hard and don't know who these people are.

There's a gulf of difference between "being mean" and "being truthful". I dare say, you haven't seen "mean" as of yet!

People got to read between the lines. If they can't do that, I'm not going to meet them more than half way.

That's your problem: there's no lines to read between.

elemtilas Sat Jun 06, 2020 5:50 pm

So you want the dictionary and grammar she made in 1995? Write me a private message and only give it to people who ask. I think I got it on a facebook group and can give you a copy. Most of it is in my links, which you totally misrepresent in your descriptions of them above.

I don't think I've misinterpreted, but if you think so, do show me where you think I've done so.

As for what I want: it's what I asked for already! When we first met years ago, my hope was that you would actually obtain copies of Fromkin's grammar notes & lexicon. When you announced continued work on the language, my hope was that you had actually gotten something from her. My hope was that you'd be able to arrange it, describe it, and write it up properly for the language invention community. You tried that once on FrathWiki with somewhat disastrous results. I'd still like for you to contribute to that article with any new material you may have obtained.

For the purposes of our discussions, I'm really not interested in Neo-Pakuni (your own work) so much as actual Pakuni (Fromkin's work), as a community resource. You're certainly welcome to create articles on Neo-Pakuni at Frathwiki as well, and I think that would actually be a good idea, just not my line of interest.

( I realize where my work is lacking and have read tons of academic articles by linguists. What these people are saying about my work and created transcription systems is tiresome. )

Perhaps it would be wiser to use a less tiresome phonological transcription system?

I read all the replies. I have a BA Linguistics from Michigan State University from 2009 with a 3.0 GPA. I have studied linguistics a lot on my own since then.

But I specialize in logographic writing systems. So there's some things about linguistics I'm not so good at.

That said, a lot of the comments above ... People who know about linguistics and about the study of exotic languages, they can tell when people know what they're doing and know what they're talking about. My links and posts speak for themselves. They're not all polished academic articles but I would say that each one of them is useful or interesting in their own way.

This is where you put yourself in an awkward position here, as well as on FB: you're interacting with people that are either university trained linguists, self-taught linguists or philologists, well read amateur linguists & philologists, knowledgeable language inventors, and the like. And you're right: we can indeed tell when someone knows what they're talking about and when they don't!

[Frislander]

For all of the trumpeting of his BA, if this style of presentation is consistent with that he used at university I don't know how he could have even graduated. So either he's lying about having the BA or has earned the BA and therefore is capable of writing in a more coherent style but chooses not to (and I have my suspicions as to which is the more likely).

[bradrn]

For all of the trumpeting of his BA, if this style of presentation is consistent with that he used at university I don't know how he could have even graduated. So either he's lying about having the BA or has earned the BA and therefore is capable of writing in a more coherent style but chooses not to (and I have my suspicions as to which is the more likely).

Actually, I noticed that some of his other documents (particularly https://naviklingon.blogspot.com/2018/1 ... w=flipcard) do use a style consistent with a working knowledge of linguistics. So, at this point, I’m pretty sure he isn’t lying, but just prefers his own style of presentation. (Remember that Bob has said that his primary audience is non-linguists via Facebook, which definitely encourages this sort of style.) Anyway, I’m not sure how productive or useful it is to accuse Bob of lying about his qualifications: I for one prefer to judge people on the quality of their work rather than on the basis of which qualifications they may or may not have.

[masako]

I for one prefer to judge people on the quality of their work rather than on the basis of which qualifications they may or may not have.

Then you either have grotesque taste, or don't understand what quality is...in any case, your white knight routine is lame. And I intend to ignore the entire thing from this point forward.

[bradrn]

I for one prefer to judge people on the quality of their work rather than on the basis of which qualifications they may or may not have.

Then you either have grotesque taste, or don't understand what quality is...

I was talking in general — not just in this specific case. (Besides, I was careful to avoid saying how much quality I think Bob’s work has, to avoid upsetting either you or Bob — I was just making the point that accusing him of lying about his qualifications probably isn’t the best thing to do.)

in any case, your white knight routine is lame. And I intend to ignore the entire thing from this point forward.

What on Earth is a ‘white knight routine’ supposed to be? And I think it would probably be useful at this point to clearly state my views on this matter:

• Within the specialised context of Pakuni, Atlantean etc., Bob clearly knows what he’s talking about.
• However, it is a pity that he doesn’t present this knowledge clearly (though he has been getting better at this).
• As for his linguistic knowledge, I’m inclined to believe that he does know at least the fundamentals of linguistics, based on his (admittedly sparse) use of linguistic terms.
• However, he should utilise this knowledge to a greater extent, to make his posts clearer.
• The issue of Bob’s claimed credentials is neither here nor there, but accusing him of lying about them is definitely counterproductive.
• Personally, I don’t care about credentials — I just claim about what knowledge he has demonstrated in his posts. I don’t believe you have a degree in linguistics, yet I respect you due to your clear mastery of the subject and your amazing conlang Kala. (Same goes for most other people here.) Bob claims he has a degree in linguistics, yet for the most part he does not show this in his posts; I would be a lot less ambivalent about his work if he demonstrated this knowledge to us in a more consistent and sophisticated manner.
• Despite all of that, I still think that we should treat Bob more kindly than we have been treating him so far. I doubt any of the above things are due to any sort of malice — I’m willing to believe that they’re just due to (possibly wilful) ignorance of the norms around here, combined with passion about this subject. (Some of his posts actually remind me of me, at the many points in time when I have been extremely enthusiastic about a subject, but have gaps in my knowledge (which I am usually unaware of) preventing me from doing it properly.)

[elemtilas]

Despite all of that, I still think that we should treat Bob more kindly than we have been treating him so far. I doubt any of the above things are due to any sort of malice — I’m willing to believe that they’re just due to (possibly wilful) ignorance of the norms around here, combined with passion about this subject. (Some of his posts actually remind me of me, at the many points in time when I have been extremely enthusiastic about a subject, but have gaps in my knowledge (which I am usually unaware of) preventing me from doing it properly.)

For my part at least, I'd just note that much of the reaction is due to having dealt with Bob or Larry or George or whatever it is he's calling himself this year before. And few of those dealings were particularly pleasant; some were downright distasteful. Having waded through the recent threads, it's clear that very little has changed in the way he presents himself & his work or in how he approaches others.

Give it a couple years and we'll see the same old same old, either here or in an as of yet unsuspecting forum.