Questions about conlangs in history.
- popisfizzy
- Niš
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:22 pm
- Location: Altoona, PA, USA
- Contact:
Questions about conlangs in history.
Not really about actual conlangs in history, but as a hypothetical question. Assume we happen upon a previously-undiscovered language with extensive documents in said language. Though it's not apparent, this hypothetical langauge is a constructed language. Through available tools, is there any way one could demonstrate this conclusively, or even come up with a strong hypothesis?
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
In theory, no. I see no obstacle in the way of any degree of naturalism.
In practice, I can think of two telltales, though they're subtle and would just be clues, not proofs.
1) Most conlangers take shortcuts, and this might be noticeable. E.g., no borrowings at all, or borrowings from just one language; absolutely regular sound change; absolutely regular morphology.
2) More subtly, a conlanger can only imitate things she's aware of. E.g. a pre-1800s conlang might include rule-less sound changes; a pre-1960s conlang might have unlikely syntax because the conlanger knew nothing about generative grammar. Though there are few universals, there are some near-universals and a conlang might violate a bunch of them.
(Note that naturalistic conlangs are a fairly recent thing.)
In practice, I can think of two telltales, though they're subtle and would just be clues, not proofs.
1) Most conlangers take shortcuts, and this might be noticeable. E.g., no borrowings at all, or borrowings from just one language; absolutely regular sound change; absolutely regular morphology.
2) More subtly, a conlanger can only imitate things she's aware of. E.g. a pre-1800s conlang might include rule-less sound changes; a pre-1960s conlang might have unlikely syntax because the conlanger knew nothing about generative grammar. Though there are few universals, there are some near-universals and a conlang might violate a bunch of them.
(Note that naturalistic conlangs are a fairly recent thing.)
-
- Avisaru
- Posts: 370
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:22 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
Because linguistics has progressed since Zamenhof, and so has taste.zompist wrote:(Note that naturalistic conlangs are a fairly recent thing.)
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
Well, the changes in taste aren't always progress. Zamenhof brought in a fashion for a posteriori auxlangs, which were produced in depressing quantity. Many of them are arguably improvements on Esperanto, but the whole problem with that approach is that people could never agree on the criteria to use.
I think Volapük is underappreciated. It's a little weirder than Esperanto, which I think is a positive. I don't know if Shm Jay still keeps up with it...
I think Volapük is underappreciated. It's a little weirder than Esperanto, which I think is a positive. I don't know if Shm Jay still keeps up with it...
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
Do some of the Australian langs that were made up because of speech taboos (e.g. Damin, and a few sign languages) count as conlangs? Most aboriginal signs are just cyphers, but Damin is fairly divergent.
-
- Avisaru
- Posts: 370
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:22 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
Hypothesis: it is a conlang if this ratio is high or was high in the past:
deliberately invented words by living speakers = C
total lexicon
The classic conlang has a C of 100% (where some single person or group makes all the words up out of his own head (quenya, klingon). Presumably a natlang has a low ratio, but not zero, because of language change. Borrowings from other languages do not count unless they change meaning, but slang terms (mec, yob, jazz) do. If somebody takes a natlang and deliberately applies sound changes to derive a daughter language, the derived words count as inventions, and the result is a conlang. Sound changes as a result of natural language drift do not count, becuase no speaker intends to change her mother tongue out of recognition. Pidgins (which consist entirely of borrowings) do not count, and therefore creoles do not.
Corollary: A language evolving naturally has a low C throughout the process. A poet like Shakespeare may coin hundreds of words and raise the numerator, but he is increasing the total lexicon at the same time, so C does not increase all that much.
I suppose if large numbers of taboo words are lost from Damin at the same time as large numbers of words are invented, and it was developed over a short period (i.e. over a single lifetime) it might be approaching a threshold value of C above which a language can be considered to be a conlang.
deliberately invented words by living speakers = C
total lexicon
The classic conlang has a C of 100% (where some single person or group makes all the words up out of his own head (quenya, klingon). Presumably a natlang has a low ratio, but not zero, because of language change. Borrowings from other languages do not count unless they change meaning, but slang terms (mec, yob, jazz) do. If somebody takes a natlang and deliberately applies sound changes to derive a daughter language, the derived words count as inventions, and the result is a conlang. Sound changes as a result of natural language drift do not count, becuase no speaker intends to change her mother tongue out of recognition. Pidgins (which consist entirely of borrowings) do not count, and therefore creoles do not.
Corollary: A language evolving naturally has a low C throughout the process. A poet like Shakespeare may coin hundreds of words and raise the numerator, but he is increasing the total lexicon at the same time, so C does not increase all that much.
I suppose if large numbers of taboo words are lost from Damin at the same time as large numbers of words are invented, and it was developed over a short period (i.e. over a single lifetime) it might be approaching a threshold value of C above which a language can be considered to be a conlang.
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
Damin, according to it's speakers, was invented by the gods. Considering it exists to circumnavigate a taboo, not against certain words, but against speech itself, it probably fits your definition of conlang.I suppose if large numbers of taboo words are lost from Damin at the same time as large numbers of words are invented, and it was developed over a short period (i.e. over a single lifetime) it might be approaching a threshold value of C above which a language can be considered to be a conlang.
- Herr Dunkel
- Smeric
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:21 pm
- Location: In this multiverse or another
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
Damin is probably categorisable as a group conlang, conllaboolang, maybe (constructed-collaborated-taboo-language) ?
sano wrote:To my dearest Darkgamma,
http://www.dazzlejunction.com/greetings/thanks/thank-you-bear.gif
Sincerely,
sano
-
- Avisaru
- Posts: 370
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:22 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
I deliberately didn't include a term for "number of people inventing words" so that group conlangs would qualify.
- ol bofosh
- Smeric
- Posts: 1169
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2011 5:30 pm
- Location: tʰæ.ɹʷˠə.ˈgɜʉ̯.nɜ kʰæ.tə.ˈlɜʉ̯.nʲɜ spɛ̝ɪ̯n ˈjʏː.ɹəʔp
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
At what point might a conlang like Esperanto become a natlang?
It was about time I changed this.
- Herr Dunkel
- Smeric
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:21 pm
- Location: In this multiverse or another
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
Two to five hundred years is I assume a good enough gap in time.treegod wrote:At what point might a conlang like Esperanto become a natlang?
sano wrote:To my dearest Darkgamma,
http://www.dazzlejunction.com/greetings/thanks/thank-you-bear.gif
Sincerely,
sano
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
125 down, anywhere between 75 and 375 to go.Elector Dark wrote:Two to five hundred years is I assume a good enough gap in time.treegod wrote:At what point might a conlang like Esperanto become a natlang?
[i]Linguistics will become a science when linguists begin standing on one another's shoulders instead of on one another's toes.[/i]
—Stephen R. Anderson
[i]Málin eru höfuðeinkenni þjóðanna.[/i]
—Séra Tómas Sæmundsson
—Stephen R. Anderson
[i]Málin eru höfuðeinkenni þjóðanna.[/i]
—Séra Tómas Sæmundsson
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
Does modern, spoken Esperanto have any irregularities (or well-defined sound changes) yet?
-
- Niš
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 12:14 am
- Location: Florida
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
> Does modern, spoken Esperanto have any irregularities (or well-defined sound changes) yet?
Those who learned Esperanto intentionally as a medium of international communication are somewhat hostile to irregularities or sound changes. IMHO they will never deviate far from the grammar, pronunciation and core vocabulary that Zamenhof designed.
I don't know what the native speakers of Esperanto are up to. In pre-internet, pre-Skype days they might not have had many chances to converse with other native speakers outside of their own families. Now at least in theory they could have worldwide conversations and create some sort of mutant dialect.
Those who learned Esperanto intentionally as a medium of international communication are somewhat hostile to irregularities or sound changes. IMHO they will never deviate far from the grammar, pronunciation and core vocabulary that Zamenhof designed.
I don't know what the native speakers of Esperanto are up to. In pre-internet, pre-Skype days they might not have had many chances to converse with other native speakers outside of their own families. Now at least in theory they could have worldwide conversations and create some sort of mutant dialect.
- Radius Solis
- Smeric
- Posts: 1248
- Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 5:40 pm
- Location: Si'ahl
- Contact:
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
There's a very nice article here about, among other things, the changes Esperanto has undergone, which I found originally through Zompist's blog some weeks back.dhokarena56 wrote:Does modern, spoken Esperanto have any irregularities (or well-defined sound changes) yet?
Highlights include: the accusative is doomed; there's a whole new range of periphrastic tenses; it's developing a new mediopassive voice and a new subjunctive mood; and the vowel endings are getting re-purposed and oozing into dimensions never intended for them. Most of these changes to Esperanto are mainly in literary Esperanto, not so much natively-spoken Esperanto. Likewise, regular sound changes don't yet seem to be in evidence - native speakers are just not in regular enough contact with each other.
Nightwriter: what people think they are doing with their language and what they are actually doing are, generally, two quite separate questions. People having all the above changes probably mostly still think they're adhering well to Zamenhof.
- ol bofosh
- Smeric
- Posts: 1169
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2011 5:30 pm
- Location: tʰæ.ɹʷˠə.ˈgɜʉ̯.nɜ kʰæ.tə.ˈlɜʉ̯.nʲɜ spɛ̝ɪ̯n ˈjʏː.ɹəʔp
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
I suppose it might go the way of Latin, dialects will diverge and languages will emerge. Then there will be those that learn "Classical Esperanto" in the same way people learn Latin, existing alongside its spawn. Zamenhof's work will always be around to learn from.
It was about time I changed this.
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
Given the absence of sound change, it sounds more to me like the divergence between Classical Latin and post-Classical Latin (preserved to this day as an international auxiliary language). Still mutually intelligible, but obviously not the same beast.ol bofosh wrote:I suppose it might go the way of Latin, dialects will diverge and languages will emerge. Then there will be those that learn "Classical Esperanto" in the same way people learn Latin, existing alongside its spawn. Zamenhof's work will always be around to learn from.
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
One possible candicate could be the so-called Voynich Manuscript.
It is a medieval book, written in a scribe that hasn't been decoded by anyone.
We are not enterily certain what the book contains : one of the guesses is "a tract on alchemy".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voynich_manuscript
It is a medieval book, written in a scribe that hasn't been decoded by anyone.
We are not enterily certain what the book contains : one of the guesses is "a tract on alchemy".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voynich_manuscript
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
The best hypothesis on the Voynich manuscript is that it was produced using a Cardan grille. The text doesn't have the frequency characteristics of a language (most of which would be noticeable even if it were a cipher).
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
I have recently come across an interesting blogpost by computational linguist Jürgen Hermes (in German) which suggests that the Voynich text may have been produced using an elaborate substitution cipher which replaces each letter with a full word, with a different word (taken from a special kind of dictionary) each time the letter occurs. The method in question has been described in Johannes Trithemius' "Polygraphia" (1508), originally producing fake Latin text (which is grammatical but nonsensical, achieved by taking into account the part-of-speech of the cipher words, cf. this post). The method was apparently copied by a few other 16th century cryptographers and adapted to produce fake text in other languages, and Trithemius himself adapted it (possibly in a slightly modified form) to producing text that looks like words from a taxonomic conlang. Here's an excerpt from Trithemius' codepage for the latter; the image also appears in the first article I linked above. Anyway, according to Hermes, text produced with these ciphers has letter frequencies and distributions that are very similar to the odd statistics of the Voynich manuscript.zompist wrote:The best hypothesis on the Voynich manuscript is that it was produced using a Cardan grille. The text doesn't have the frequency characteristics of a language (most of which would be noticeable even if it were a cipher).
Blog: audmanh.wordpress.com
Conlangs: Ronc Tyu | Buruya Nzaysa | Doayâu | Tmaśareʔ
Conlangs: Ronc Tyu | Buruya Nzaysa | Doayâu | Tmaśareʔ
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
I wonder if it was some sort of language game-out-of-control process that created it. Boontling was created in a way that resembles chanspeak.Elector Dark wrote:Damin is probably categorisable as a group conlang, conllaboolang, maybe (constructed-collaborated-taboo-language) ?
One other weird thing about Damin is it is the only click language in the world not in Africa, and clicks are posited as being some of the most ancient phones in any language so...maybe some sort of contact scenario?
- Drydic
- Smeric
- Posts: 1652
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 12:23 pm
- Location: I am a prisoner in my own mind.
- Contact:
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
Damin was constructed to be deliberately weird as hell.
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
Damin is also extinct.
Do we know for sure it was a conlang? I thought the idea that it was conlanged was just speculative.
Do we know for sure it was a conlang? I thought the idea that it was conlanged was just speculative.
- Drydic
- Smeric
- Posts: 1652
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 12:23 pm
- Location: I am a prisoner in my own mind.
- Contact:
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
It was constructed by the elders of whatever tribe to deliberately be weird.
Re: Questions about conlangs in history.
According to who? Ken Hale?