In the "Languages you'd like to see" thread, it occurred to me that Zomp has actually uploaded a hell of a lot of conlang grammars, while most of us can't even get one decent grammatical sketch finished and uploaded in a decent time period. So I'd like to ask: how do you do it?
You've written about how you create languages, but not about how you write grammars. How long does it normally take, from start to finish, and do you have any tips for getting the damn things finished?
Question for Zomp
Question for Zomp
Salmoneus wrote:(NB Dewrad is behaving like an adult - a petty, sarcastic and uncharitable adult, admittedly, but none the less note the infinitely higher quality of flame)
It's hard to say. Why do others have trouble finishing? 
Partly it's familiarity— I've written a lot, and I've done a lot of grammars. Plus, all the really bad and embarrassing stuff was done before the web era, so by the time I was making things public, they were reasonably polished.
A grammar could take anything from 2 months to a year. (The ones that took longer to gestate are really re-writes.) Generally the guts of the language— pronouns, morphology— is done in a short, feverish time so I don't lose momentum and I rarely have to go back and rework them as I work through the syntax and examples.
Sometimes it's like pulling teeth; but unlike a novel, it's usually clear what needs to be done next. So, I can make progress even if it's only a page a day.
I'd also suggest, don't overthink it. Most of the flavor of a language is due to the phonotactics, anyway... most of the other decisions are arbitrary. Put features in because you'd like to work with them, not to be impressive.
Partly it's familiarity— I've written a lot, and I've done a lot of grammars. Plus, all the really bad and embarrassing stuff was done before the web era, so by the time I was making things public, they were reasonably polished.
A grammar could take anything from 2 months to a year. (The ones that took longer to gestate are really re-writes.) Generally the guts of the language— pronouns, morphology— is done in a short, feverish time so I don't lose momentum and I rarely have to go back and rework them as I work through the syntax and examples.
Sometimes it's like pulling teeth; but unlike a novel, it's usually clear what needs to be done next. So, I can make progress even if it's only a page a day.
I'd also suggest, don't overthink it. Most of the flavor of a language is due to the phonotactics, anyway... most of the other decisions are arbitrary. Put features in because you'd like to work with them, not to be impressive.
I think the reason I don't finish grammars is that I'm not excited about sharing my work with others. Doing the research and work of developing the lang is what I enjoy, and I guess the thought of presenting it isn't that motivating to me. Trouble is, if I don't write a decent grammar, I lose my notes and forget what I've already done. :\
Sometimes I also get stuck because I can't decide on a register to write in -- whether to write a formal grammar or a Teach-Yourself or somewhere in between.
The latter is actually getting better since my partner's started to show an interest in my hobby :) and asks for explanations of what I'm doing in terms she can understand. She's just starting to study linguistics and only speaks French and English, so it offers the challenge of explaining stuff, which is kinda fun in itself. I think it helps me understand my own ideas better too.
Sometimes I also get stuck because I can't decide on a register to write in -- whether to write a formal grammar or a Teach-Yourself or somewhere in between.
The latter is actually getting better since my partner's started to show an interest in my hobby :) and asks for explanations of what I'm doing in terms she can understand. She's just starting to study linguistics and only speaks French and English, so it offers the challenge of explaining stuff, which is kinda fun in itself. I think it helps me understand my own ideas better too.
I'll be this way yet when I'm sixty
I usually become contemptuous of any grammar that I've written, develop severe antipathy and disdain toward it, then destroy or bury whatever I've made of it.
In another case, I was content with the quality of the language, or had at least deluded myself into thinking that I was, but as I wrote the description of the syntax it became more complex than I could readily keep track of in my mind and it all degenerated into a set of internal contradictions that I couldn't reconcile. I did swear that I'd revise it some day, but that was roughly three years ago.
So, I suppose I would wonder how one sets standards of quality and assesses whether one's languages meet said standards. I suppose that I should also wonder how one could keep track of complex interactions within a grammar.
In another case, I was content with the quality of the language, or had at least deluded myself into thinking that I was, but as I wrote the description of the syntax it became more complex than I could readily keep track of in my mind and it all degenerated into a set of internal contradictions that I couldn't reconcile. I did swear that I'd revise it some day, but that was roughly three years ago.
So, I suppose I would wonder how one sets standards of quality and assesses whether one's languages meet said standards. I suppose that I should also wonder how one could keep track of complex interactions within a grammar.
"Great men are almost always bad men."
~Lord John Dalberg Acton
~Lord John Dalberg Acton