Zompist Bboard Again

Mi tingk bwok Ingles in no pwoblam, oba minu sapos, mi ges, som lebl a senis bo langwic sayans, an swel, mi swel ges, som wonis fi abay dem no-ray rul minu di mek dem, wen dem yeh pas. Mi swel fil xxx sim foni pon minu wan taym o noda, yus fi kweya rayting an no won fi gi minu glos-dem. Oba mi in tingk dis a nof fi as zompist fi banis im don o so.

I don't think broken English is a problem, but we expect, I suppose, a certain level of linguistic knowledge, as well as, I also suppose, a certain willingness to abide by the unwritten rules we have made along the years. I also feel xxx is sometimes seemingly mocking us with their weird spelling and unwillingness to provide glosses. But I do think that that isn't enough to ask zompist to ban them or something.


JAL

masako wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 7:23 am niya tsimpaha

k¿k°å²°³WÃXk¿k°T²p°m´‚°ÄQkÁk¿
(my speech cleaned up not necessary and me saying at new for those having not understood words mine...)
no need for excuse, even if I am sorry for those who would not understand me, if necessary tell me I will reword...

jal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 8:24 am no won fi gi minu glos-dem.

l¿o°ÄkÁÀ‚²°Äk¿RR6´°ÄkÁk¿
(you not using this language not known by me and not much descriptive of language mine...)
I do not know Leipzig glossing rules you neither use, and which seems to me not very interesting for my language...

jal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 8:24 am ...Mi swel fil xxx sim foni pon minu wan taym o noda, yus fi kweya rayting an no won fi gi minu glos-dem. Oba mi in tingk dis a nof fi as zompist fi banis im don o so.

I also feel xxx is sometimes seemingly mocking us with their weird spelling and unwillingness to provide glosses. But I do think that that isn't enough to ask zompist to ban them or something.

芸術イ語 先々 在らにす。
「ちやうじゆふイいふ さイざイ あらにす。」
Chōjūi iyu saizai aranisu.
[c͡ɕʰʷó̞ᵝːˑ.ʑỳᵝː.ì íˑ.jỳᵝ s̪ɛ́íˑ.z̪ɛ̀ì ɐ̞́ˑ.ɾ̪ɐ̞̀.ɲì.s̪ʉ̀ᵝ]
art.skill(=art).ADJ-ADNOMINAL language first.first(=probably) copula.IRREALIS.NEGATIVE
"It probably isn't a (created) language."

しこし、在つ者が 故っを 俺い 分らめイ。
「しこし、あつどりが ゆへっを いみよい わからめイ。」
Shikosche, atsudori ga yue wo imyoi wakaramei.
[ɕì.kʰʷó̞ᵝˑ.ʃə̀ | ɐ̞́.t̪͡s̪ʰʲỳᵝ.ⁿd̪ʷó̞ᵝˑ.ɾ̪ʲì ^ŋgɐ̞̀ jýᵝˑ.(w)è̞ wò̞ᵝ ì.mᶣi̯ó̞ᵝˑ.(w)ì wɐ̞́.kʰɐ̞̀.ɾ̪ɐ̞́ˑ.mè̞ː]
however distal.DESC.person.PRONOMINAL-GENITIVE reason DEFINITE-ACCUSATIVE 1sg.NOMINATIVE know.IRREALIS.NON-EXCLUSIVE-NEGATIVE
"I don't know what his reasons are, however."

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 12:47 pm Chōjūi iyu saizai aranisu.

kÁµÀݹ²dl²²Rk°d‚²Rk°d6²XkÁµ6²ÁkÁR6²°d²m
(languages containing one sound and naming one sense and naming one sign and these languages not seen as languages of men and seen by all men...)
not all men consider philosophical languages as languages...

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 12:47 pm Shikosche, atsudori ga yue wo imyoi wakaramei.

o¹Àz°³KÅRp°kÁk¿
(this place giving sharpness to language mine...)
I'm here to improve my language

xxx wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 2:12 pm I'm here to improve my language

しこし、真く 語在らにす ほっい？
「しこし、ままく いふあらにす ほっい？」
Shikosche, mamaku iyu aranisu hoi?
[ɕì.kó̞ᵝˑ.ʃə̀ | mɐ̞́ˑ.mɐ̞̀.kʰʉ̀ᵝ íˑ.jỳᵝ ɐ̞́ˑ.ɾ̪ɐ̞̀.ɲì.s̪ʉ̀ᵝ xó̞ᵝ.(w)íˑ]
however true.ADVERBIAL language COPULA.IRREALIS.NEGATIVE INTERROGATIVE
"But is it really a language?

分り欲り像こり。
「わかりぼりざうこり。」
Wakaribori zōkori.
[wɐ̞̀.kʰɐ̞́.ɾ̪ʲì^mbʷó̞ᵝˑ.ɾ̪ʲì z̪ʷó̞ᵝː.kʰʷò̞ᵝ.ɾ̪ʲì]
know.INFINITIVE.DESIDERATIVE.INFINITIVE EMPHATIC.PREDICATIVE
"I'd really like to know"

Going by xxx’s activity at the Other Place:
- Yes, it’s a language.
- No, it’s not supposed to be naturalistic.

xxx may lack some linguistic experience that many on the board have, granted, but non-naturalistic languages are valid and I’m disappointed to see him receive shit because he’s of a less-in-depth linguistic background.

Let him have his language. Traditional glosses might be unwieldy for it the same way they often are for triconsonantal languages.

Man in Space wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 5:46 pm xxx may lack some linguistic experience that many on the board have, granted, but non-naturalistic languages are valid and I’m disappointed to see him receive shit because he’s of a less-in-depth linguistic background.

I agree. Thank you for saying so.

Let him have his language. Traditional glosses might be unwieldy for it the same way they often are for triconsonantal languages.

Still, triconsonantal languages can be glossed, and people make the effort because it’s useful to demonstrate how the language works. I think much of the confusion around xxx’s language is ultimately because none of us have any clue how it works, and they haven’t exactly been forthcoming when asked to give us more information. Which is fine, it’s their choice, but as they say in politics ‘the optics aren’t good’. (And indeed it’s lead to suspicion about their motives — the whole reason the board exists is to share information about conlangs!)

光の缺 者々語在らにすと重ふ故と 俺い考ふ。
「させきのめくみ とりどり いふあらにすと おもふ ゆへと いみよい いんよふ。」
Saseki no mekumi toridori iyu aranisu to omō yue to imyoi in'yō.
[s̪ɐ̞̀.s̪é̞ˑ.c͡çʰì n̪ʷò̞ᵝ mé̞ˑ.kʰʉ̀ᵝ.mᶣì t̪ʰʷó̞ᵝ.ɾ̪ʲì.ⁿd̪ʷó̞ᵝˑ.ɾ̪ʲì íˑ.jỳᵝ ɐ̞́ˑ.ɾ̪ɐ̞̀.ɲì.s̪ʉ̀ᵝ t̪ʰʷò̞ᵝ ó̞ᵝˑ.mʷò̞ᵝː jýᵝˑ.(w)è̞ t̪ʰʷò̞ᵝ íɲ.jò̞ᵝː]
light.GEN lack people.REDUPLICATED language COPULA.IRREALIS.NEGATIVE QUOTATIVE weigh reason QUOTATIVE 1sg.NOMINATIVE believe.PREDICATIVE
"I believe the reason people think it isn't a language is the lack of explanation."

朕が故在れれき。
「いめがゆへあれれき。」
Ime ga yue arereki.
[íˑ.mè̞.^ŋgɐ̞̀ jýᵝˑ.(w)è̞ ɐ̞́ˑ.ɾ̪è̞.ɾ̪è̞.c͡çʰì]
1sg.PRONOMINAL-GENITIVE reason COPULA.EXCLAMATORY.STATIVE.PAST
"This is why I was thinking that." (Literally, "This was my reason.")

kokiot viuidi ediei esei uidi kidio elei ejoe*
(my language not given by knowledge of languages of all men...)
no need of linguistics to build philosophical language...

(it's more a philosophical approach even if the anadew effect shows parallels between its construction and those of natural languages, but linguistics, I know enough, remains only as a confirmation of its place in the world...
I have always found the use of linguistics as a basis for language construction to be a perversion...
linguistics studies the functioning of languages, to reverse the process is to short-circuit both the linguistics and the language...)

(*)here in more traditionnal form:

xxx wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 2:28 am no need of linguistics to build philosophical language...

Naaqa bey fawetli naak wediy ‘lingwistik’?
/naːʔabəj fawət͡ɬi naːk wədij liᵑɡwistik/
who=Q say anything like ‘linguistics’

Who said anything about linguistics?

Who said anything about linguistics?

jal wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 8:24 am we expect, I suppose, a certain level of linguistic knowledge,

Man in Space wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 5:46 pmxxx may lack some linguistic experience that many on the board have, granted, but non-naturalistic languages are valid and I’m disappointed to see him receive shit because he’s of a less-in-depth linguistic background.

kioq fidiu ie
(this words not insulting...)
but it's not a problem for me...
keao higo eko oeki
(this place necessary seeing us speaking...)
we're here to speak...

I bet people would have been more generous had xxx simply given a traditional gloss for their conlang. Writing without spaces does most definitely occur in natlangs, and how xxx's language has been written could very well be akin to a conscript, but refusing to give something resembling a proper gloss gives one the impression that it is just a string of random characters and a very loose English meaning.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 10:49 amit is just a string of random characters and a very loose English meaning.

lÂÁF±`±7³ÁlÂe³l¶
(this language going towards writing speaking like all languages...)
yes, the objective is a pasigraphy...

(but yes, it's a real idiolect that I'm keeping to myself for now...)

Travis B. wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 10:49 am I bet people would have been more generous had xxx simply given a traditional gloss for their conlang. Writing without spaces does most definitely occur in natlangs, and how xxx's language has been written could very well be akin to a conscript, but refusing to give something resembling a proper gloss gives one the impression that it is just a string of random characters and a very loose English meaning.

xxx's language is about as well-understood as that of the Voynich Manuscript This matter has been discussed on the CONLANG mailing list, where Seth Kazan (as xxx is known there) says that the language was a "deductive language", i.e. a language with non-arbitrary word formation according to some systematic of ideas, which follows a rule "1 sign = 1 sound = 1 sense". Depending on whether with "sounds" xxx means segmental phonemes or syllables, this would be either an instantiation of Heinlein's Speedtalk idea, or something like idealized Chinese. Yet, all we have are seemingly arbitrary strings of odd characters, and one member of the list has conjectured that xxx was just bluffing, and the strings were meaningless. Alas, we don't know, and xxx's posts haven't really been helpful to elucidate.

(Sorry for posting in English here, but I currently don't have a conlang sufficiently developed to express such ideas.)

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 1:06 pmone member of the list has conjectured that xxx was just bluffing, and the strings were meaningless.

lÀ7±RlÂÁ
(me seeing that...)
I was there...
(it was a certain Jörg Rhiemeier, I believe (as you are known on the list ...))

xxx wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 1:48 pm

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 1:06 pmone member of the list has conjectured that xxx was just bluffing, and the strings were meaningless.

it was a certain Jörg Rhiemeier, I believe (as you are known on the list ...)

I was not the only one.

kohi diu iegi kidio
(me not seeing that...)
"bluffing" I don't remember that ...
(sorry for the smiley, but 3SDL can be rude, it's not my pupose...)

我ら 光を受わめイと 俺い在り見ゆ、へひ？
「わら させきをうくわめイと いみよいありみゆ、へひ？」
Wara sasekkyo ukamei to imyoi arimiyu, hei?
[wɐ̞́ˑ.ɾ̪ɐ̞̀ s̪ɐ̞́.s̪é̞c.c͡çʰi̯ò̞ᵝ ʉ́ˑ.kʰɐ̞̀.mè̞ː t̪ʰʷò̞ᵝ ì.mᶣi̯ó̞ᵝˑ.(w)ì ɐ̞́.ɾ̪ʲì.mᶣíˑ.jỳᵝ | hé̞ː]
1pl light.ACCUSATIVE receive.IRREALIS.NEGATIVE.PREDICATIVE QUOTATIVE 1sg.NOMINATIVE COPULA.see(=suppose).PREDICATIVE, STRONG-INTERROGATIVE
"We aren't getting an explanation, are we?"

nµnıƒÂÅ
(men unable to experience unknown...)
some people can't stand having unanswered questions...

(and for the moment this locus amoenus remains an intimate experience (and I don't think it's worth it for anyone else...))

Dvtwqnpjet yet katchanlpiat wunlczlxi?
[dʙʉ̩̃˥w̃ɒ̃˩dʑe˥ je˥ ka˥tɕæ̃˧pɕæ˥ wũ˧tsə̥ɕi̥]
weave-language=TOP.Q E.TOP three-consonant difficult-AUG
Are glosses for triconsonantal languages so difficult?

official register:
Mxljitye yinlwqnpye dvtnyixnyixmqpjet yinwqnpchix yinpiatye katrhyp yinrhzpye yinchanl xapxap raxyut wunlczlye tql?
[m̩˩˥ʑi˥je˧ j̃ĩ˧w̃ɒ̃˩j̃ẽ˧ ɗv̩˥ɲi˩˥ɲi˩˥mɒ˩je˥ j̃ĩ˥w̃ɒ̃˩tɕi˩˥ ji˥pɕa˥je˧ ka˥tʂʐ̩˩ j̃ĩ˩tʂə˩je˧ j̃ĩ˧tɕã˧ ɕa˩ɕa˩ ⁿdʐa˩˥jʉ˥ w̃ũ˧tsə˧je˧ tɒ˧]
foreign-E CLF-language-E weave-MAJ~render-NMLZ=TOP.Q CLF-language-POSS CLF-word-E three-INAN CLF-sound-E MAJ~bring Q difficulty-E AUG