LCK Two

[zompist]

As I mentioned on my blog, I've decided to write a sequel to the Language Construction Kit.

I only got 3 submissions to the proposed essay collection, so I decided to go this direction instead.

The blog entry mentions some of the topics I intend to cover. But if you wanted to hear more about something, why, you could say so right here!

[linguoboy]

What's this about a proposed essay collection? I've got some old LJ posts I might could tidy up for that.

[Aurora Rossa]

Sweet, epic! I'll need to start saving up for it.

[Curlyjimsam]

From memory (I haven't got the book with me), I found the section of pragmatics was more an overview of general pragmatic theory, without much about how one might actually apply this to a conlang - little information on cross-linguistic pragmatic variation or anything like that. So perhaps more of that kind of thing would be useful.

Also maybe more on the outcomes of language contact (so this would connect to bilingualism and borrowing). This is something that plays quite a big part in my conlanging, but in the current versions of my languages it isn't terribly realistic as I didn't understand it when I first started them.

[Mr. Z]

Yes, language contact is a great idea. I haven't read the first LCK, though.

[Aurora Rossa]

Something about sociolinguistics would also help as well, particularly how concepts like prestige affect the development of dialects.

[Bristel]

Time for me to re-read LCK One and try to find gaps or things that need to be expounded a bit...

Will there be a second grammar at the back, like LCK One with the Kebreni grammar?

[dhok]

An explanation of how to do polysynthesis, perhaps.

[Bristel]

Deeper explanations of morphosyntax.

I for one, would love a semi-detailed discussion of tripartite systems.

[dhok]

Deeper explanations of morphosyntax.

I for one, would love a semi-detailed discussion of tripartite systems.

Seconded. Perhaps you could have a section that'd be kind of like a less intense Describing Morphosyntax.

[Left]

As I mentioned on my blog, I've decided to write a sequel to the Language Construction Kit.

Yayyyyy

[zompist]

Will there be a second grammar at the back, like LCK One with the Kebreni grammar?

Maybe! Did you find that useful?

[Miiil]

Will there be a second grammar at the back, like LCK One with the Kebreni grammar?

Maybe! Did you find that useful?

Yes. It helped with layout, and explaining how to present the ideas that you have.

Also seeing some of your ideas, and how you went about it.

[Aurora Rossa]

Will this sequel be darker and edgier, like The Empire Strikes Back, or merely an attempt to cash in on the popularity of the first book like one of those direct-to-video Disney sequels?

[Pthagnar]

tits

[alice]

Did you get my reply to your email?

Maybe we could have a straw poll on what else should go into the LCK2?

[Bristel]

Will there be a second grammar at the back, like LCK One with the Kebreni grammar?

Maybe! Did you find that useful?

Yes, and it happened to be more useful than the online version (at least for me). And made it more apparent how a well-structured but simple grammar can make it easier to glean information.

The part about the Japanese influence, or similarities, gave me ideas on what to do with a grammar of my own. Putting in examples of languages where a particular part of morphosyntax or what have you, might make grammars more interesting to read.

[prettydragoon]

As I mentioned on my blog, I've decided to write a sequel to the Language Construction Kit.

That's awesome news!

[Ser]

What's this about a proposed essay collection? I've got some old LJ posts I might could tidy up for that.

It relates to a call for essays he did back in December 2010:

http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=36606

[Radius Solis]

The other pun titles are momentarily amusing, but what this is really crying out to be called is The Language Construction Caboodle.

[Nannalu]

You should tell people how to form language families (I don't know if LCK explained this because I haven't read it) because some are quite confused on how to go about it. Mention things such as language families, dialects, isolation, etc.

[Miiil]

You should tell people how to form language families (I don't know if LCK explained this because I haven't read it) because some are quite confused on how to go about it. Mention things such as language families, dialects, isolation, etc.

LCKOne has a chapter on it.

[dhok]

Ooh! Ooh! You could choose a few interesting natlangs- ones that are really different- and give them short but meaty descriptions. For example, you could do a ten-page description of a complex synthetic language (Russian, for example) and an isolating one (Mandarin) and a polysynthetic one (Inuktitut). Then people could see how really different sorts of languages are working "in action".

[Miekko]

Ooh! Ooh! You could choose a few interesting natlangs- ones that are really different- and give them short but meaty descriptions. For example, you could do a ten-page description of a complex synthetic language (Russian, for example) and an isolating one (Mandarin) and a polysynthetic one (Inuktitut). Then people could see how really different sorts of languages are working "in action".

I can play this game too!

You could explain what cases are. Or maybe tenses. Aspects could be a good thing to cover as well. And over-specific tense systems!

[Bob Johnson]

Ooh! Ooh! You could choose a few interesting natlangs- ones that are really different- and give them short but meaty descriptions. For example, you could do a ten-page description of a complex synthetic language (Russian, for example) and an isolating one (Mandarin) and a polysynthetic one (Inuktitut). Then people could see how really different sorts of languages are working "in action".

Hm. I've wondered if writing up a natlang as if it were a conlang would be a good idea. Gloss over some details, focus on the interesting parts, try to cram enough information into 5-10 pages that a linguist could claim that they speak it.