Forum:Conlang Featuring

Discuss which language to feature on the front page here.

Not sure how things work? Go here Honoured Languages

 Quai'op   won this month! Check the Archive if you want to see the discussion and votes for its contest.

''' of voting for August. '''

Discussion
DISCUSSION ISNT FOR VOTING! The Emperor Zelos 05:29, July 20, 2010 (UTC)

Kti
I don't think I would be able to decide between pro and con; I think the language is unique and complete (in grammar). However, I find it moderately arbitrary, with most derivations being random and not seeming to take into account how languages evolve. As it is an alien language, I leave it up to you to decide whether this is a good thing or a bad thing. —Detectivekenny; (Info ) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 03:04, July 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I guess Rostov-na-don 03:15, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

I believe it's still a little too early for me to vote, so here's something that was on my mind as I looked through your article. It's a language with potential, yes, but the major thing that irked me was the lack of indepth examples. Things came off as a bit unorganized as I read things, tried to grasp an idea of it, and then suddenly it's on to the next topic. I think examples other than the occasional tables (try using phrases instead of simple words, i.e. instead of i loved, try something like i loved to eat apples in the morning, or something that would provide a wider insight to the sentence formation, etc, etc.). Also, I noticed your personal pronouns only came in one -- unmentioned -- case? I don't know if you're still working on cases or not, but in a VOS language, it's going to be really hard for many if there aren't cases. On the other hand, I absolutely loved your animacy classifications, and find that, should you input declensions, they would be fascinating classes for declensions. Cymarþa fum zuð conleìňé su! (Good luck with your conlang!) LctrGzmn 06:57, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Truth is there are 27 cases and I'm too lazy to upload them now, t'be honest. Oh, and shouldn't in-depth examples be under 'Example text'? Thanks for the simple phrase tip, will use that :) Rostov-na-don 13:13, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

That's mighty hefty. Well it seems that the lack of cases puts you behind and you don't seem to meet the criteria. Luckily, you've got plenty of time. And no, ot necessarily. For example, some languages handle the subjunctive differently than others do, so examples on what's in the subjunctive definitely help. I'm not saying that your language needs help in the subjunctive -- for i'm not sure it even has it -- but this is just an example. Just helping out! :} LctrGzmn 03:30, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

I think I'm done with moods, so if it's not there, it's not in the language :] Anyways, I'ma start adding cases now, hopefully, this'll work out fine. The cases are prob'ly my biggest undertaking yet :) Rostov-na-don 01:57, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

Zxoaame
It's a curse that I can't seem to organize information for others. It seems fine to me, but then again, my brain is a bit dysfunctional XD

Does anyone have any suggestions as far as organization? Razlem 00:54, August 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Your phonology's fine, except for your consonants. I know Zxoaame may be straightforward and all, but it still does one good to have a traditional consonant table up (look at the IPA for any help). Also, as it is, people that DO know the IPA know the IPA by character rather than by name (honestly, if someone was to tell me sz represented an apical voiceless alveolar fricative, I'd be stumped, etc.) so a consonant table would help, and then a separate explanation very much like your digraph chart, which I find really good. LctrGzmn 01:03, August 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * May I use Adwan's as a template? Razlem 01:51, August 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I fixed up that whole section. Razlem 23:42, August 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: I'm probably an organisational perfectionist, so if you want, include me into the group of dysfunctional xD Rostov-na-don 17:53, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

Draw
Just in case there is a draw, what shall we do? Continue voting, let Zelos decide, or possibly leave none featured? Rostov-na-don 16:57, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

Uhh, it's a draw, and even after almost an entire month, nothing happened :P Rostov-na-don 09:03, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

Vuén Nabóştï
This is mainly a response to Rostov-na-don. I agree with you about the organization thing, and the page will be corrected when I have more time to do so, but I thought I explained those sounds. (From the Vuén Nabóştï page) "Vowels are given two different diacritics depending on their placing in a word. If they are at the end of a word, they get two dots above them, such as “ä”. This does not affect the word's pronunciation. If they are in the accented part of the word, they get a slash above them, such as “ó”. Keep in mind that neither of these affect “ė”. It is possible to have more than one accent in a word. If the accent is at the end of the word, it overwrites the two dots. The accent is not specifically attached to the point in the word it is and can move around, depending on how the speaker pronounces it." So there is no difference between é, ó, and ï and e, o, and i.

I also would love to have a bit of help, though I'm not sure how that would work out. Thanks for the criticism so far, however! Keshi 6:41, August 17, 2010(2010-8-17) GMT-6:00 Central Time


 * And what exactly is the point of adding a diaeresis/umlaut to every vowel that's at the end of every word if it doesn't change anything? I'm not going to vote against you on that, but it seems quite pointless.LctrGzmn 00:46, August 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * For placement's sake. There are a few languages that have different letters for endings (Hebrew has some if I remember correctly). That's all they are, really. Keshi 8:58, August 17, 2010(2010-8-17) GMT-6:00 Central Time
 * Uhh, Semitic alphabets have distinct set of symbols for every letter, Initial, Medial, Final, Isolated, so, hmm... might be acceptable. Rostov-na-don 14:05, August 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Like mine, but when romanising that is pointless though The Emperor Zelos 20:06, August 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Semitic languages which use Arabic alphabets and the Hebew alphabet use them because of the fact they need them. Arabic's all linked together that it would be impossible to read if the different positions didn't have different forms. However, like Zelos said, it's pretty pointless for a Roman alphabet considering we don't have trouble telling when a word ends... that, and not all vowels would recieve a diaeresis/umlaut, only those that end a word. Consonants recieve no special diacritics, either, so really, in my opinion (I have no specific say as to how you govern your conlang, these are simply a few tips) the umlauts are pointless if they don't specifically mean anything. LctrGzmn 00:31, August 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Semitic alphabets, at least Arabic and Hebrew ones, use spaces, so their distinct symbols are also a tad bit pointless... Rostov-na-don 08:53, August 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * It comes from the inherent strucvture of their writting a slight space occure but it is not in anyway similar in purpose and origin like ours. The Emperor Zelos 10:41, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

Nominations:
NB: For all those obsessing about, complaining, talking about or referencing KSLs (Kitchen Sink Languages) go -> here.

For those who are interested, I found a list of sentences of which if you are able to translate them into your language's grammar and words. It's essentially in a state of completeness, click here.

''' of nominating for September. '''

Nomination Rules

 * 1) The language must have the banner translated or be in a stage where it can be done by anyone.
 * 2) Conlangs may be re-nominated for another go after having won when 3 months have passed.
 * 3) State the purpose of the conlang in the description.

Nominating
EDIT: Uhh, I have a banner now, don't wanna be disqualified :P Rostov-na-don 16:04, July 2, 2010 (UTC) Nominations are closed
 * Kti
 * I just nominated to get some reviews on my language, to see where I have flawed, and where I have succseeded. I'm not saying that it's anywhere near extraordinary, magnificent or awesome, but it's not rubbish as well. Oh, I'll get back to relevant stuff just about now: I started to construct Kti simply for the sake of my story, and at this rate, when done with Kti, I will complete the language family represented in my story. Simply said, it's an artlang. Honestly, there isn't a banner or any translation whatsoever, simply because I think that grammar is more important than words, as words don't mean much without grammar. Rostov-na-don 13:48, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Bengedian
 * I nominate this mostly because as far as i can see looking through it seems decent enough for a shot at the competition The Emperor Zelos 13:33, July 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ancient Qâêr
 * Do i need to say it? it was once up for it, it has waited long enough for a renomination and hence I set it up to give it some competition The Emperor Zelos 13:33, July 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Zxoaame
 * If the nominations haven't been cleared, I assume they were renewed. Anyways, I'd like to nominate my newest language, an artlang. It's not terribly complex in terms of linguistic potential, but I figure it can be featured material. Razlem 19:02, August 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Vuén Nabóştï
 * I'm interested in seeing how this little guy could compete with others. It started as randomly writing semi-intelligible phrases on a scrap of paper and then later changing them to have meaning and structure. Upon entering the Vanar roleplay, I decided to apply the language to the people of my nation. Kesh 2:08, August 17, 2010(2010-8-17) GMT-6:00 Central Time
 * For June??? ;) :P :) Adagio burner 07:01, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Voting Rules
To make things clear, you can start voting before the 21st and until the last day (28th) change the votings whenever your heart so pleases. You will vote con or pro for a language, you don't have to do both, if you think it has only con then you vote con and describe why its con or pro. The rules will be these thought:
 * 1) Self voting does not count to the total (There are far too few of us to dilute the effect).
 * 2) Pro vote on oneself is a self vote
 * 3) Con vote on everyone else is self vote
 * 4) You may vote cons on all but one as a non-nominee, as nominee it is all but two. Pro votes may go to all but ones own conlang.
 * 5) Unregistered voters may not vote, but are still welcome to post comments and such.
 * 6) Newly registered people may not vote for 3 weeks and must be working on a conlang of some sort
 * 7) Try voting what you think looks best in accordance to these criterias.
 * 8) Realistic: Does the language look as if it could be spoken, written, listened to and read understandably?
 * 9) Goal: Does it reach the goal it is meant to fullfill, if it intends being universal judge it in accordance, if it tries being natural judge it in accordance.
 * 10) Completeness: How close is it to completion?
 * 11) Bots (ZeBot) cannot vote at all.

Ancient Qâêr

 * Con: There's a major flaw in the fact he has both a genitive and a possessive case. It's not so much that he has both cases, as one can be used for static and the other for passive possessions, but his "possessive case" seems more of a prefix for possessive adjectives than it does an actual case. The orthography, too, is almost non-existant, which I found pretty shallow for a language LctrGzmn 03:57, July 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why does the text matter? It can be easily romanized. Why is it a good thing for a conlang to use the latin alphabet? —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:42, July 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * ... I never said anything about whatever alphabet you're using. I just mentioned that you're explanation of the language's orthography isn't very good. All you do is point out the corresponding letter next to the IPA symbol next to non-latin characters, and that seems a bit messy as it is. LctrGzmn 00:36, July 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why is it a flaw that I have both Genitive and Possessive, they are used for completely different things. Firstly, the Possessive case is a suffix, not a prefix. the Possessive is used to indicate direct Possession of physical objects between two nouns, i.e The House of Man. The Steering Wheel of the Car, whereas genitive is used to describe an attribute or non-physical characteristic of a noun or object, e.g "A Man of Virtue. and e.c.t. I haven;t posted the Orthography on the wiki yet as 1) I thought the grammar and phonetics/phonology was more important in the context of the wiki, and 2) I'm too busy fixing up moods and my system of Path Verbs and the Absolute Spatial reference system. However thank you for the criticism and I'll try to update the Orthography as soon as possible. vii 1:18 AM, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * You don't get it. The big flaw is that the possessive is not a case. If you look into it, the usage of it being called is a case is redunant and inaccurate. Why is it not a case? Because it is a form of an adjective. You could say the house of Martha or Martha's house, yes? How about if we put that into the dative -- I went to the house of Martha  would be a correct usage of the genitive, while in the sentence I went to Martha's House , while still grammatically correct, has a different structure than you think. In I went to Martha's house, martha's has to be declined, because it is an adjective -- assuming you decline adjectives at all, if not, it would still be incorrect to call it a possessive case, but merely a possessive afix, not a case -- it must agree with whatever noun it describes. Now, i've noticed you've changed your argument/conlang up a little, so I'll also point out that the technical term for that is static possessive and active possessive. Just an insight into the usage of such "possessive" cases. Secondly, you're overlooking phonology, which is the first step of a language. Sure you have your sounds, but how to write them? No explicit rules or explanations? We all might as well be illiterate. Anyway, I'm not trying to sound mean at all if you get offended or anything, these are just my two cents. LctrGzmn 00:25, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not getting ofeended so don't worry, I just don't agree with you that Possessive is not a case. Maybe in some languages like English the Possesive behaves in this way and therefore shouldn't be called a proper case (e.g in english it is definately NOT a case, however in my language it acts, or i believe it to act and wnat it to, like any other case.) In your example I went to the house of Martha , I would have put Martha in the possessive case, (it becoming basically - I go[past] [defined]house[dative] Martha[possessive]), not the genitive, in my conalng. In relation to Phonology and orthography, in my script for my language I have one symbol for all the ohonemes you see on my Phonology table, however i have not created this script into a font yet and therefore i mus use romanisation (my own style unfortunately) which is why i don't have one letter for every sound because i am restricted to the latin alphabet and didnt want to use funny random symbols because this makes for hard typing and also people who know what these symbols mean then get annoyed at me for using them falsely. vii 3:07 AM, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * You know that's basically the genitive case, right? I know what you mean, though. It would be helpful for you to explicitly state the controversies, and define the possessive case as a stative genitive, while the genitive is a passive genitive, because there are a terribly high number of mislead people who think the possessive case is a case of its own. Kudos to you on distinguishing the difference between static and passive possession. One doesn't see that very much! Secondly, might I suggest you use digraphs? It's not painful to have letters with diacritics, but you know as well as I do that there's a limit. Perhaps digraphs for most sounds and then diacritics for specific consonants, like Polish? Digraphs usually complicate a language's orthography, which I find to be a real bonus. I myself have been debating getting rid of the most common diacritic š, č, ž, etc. Personally, I'm for digraphs. It shapes a language and gives its orthography that certain look, don't you think? And of course, you could just use letters with diacritics on those that are universally known, like š for [ʃ], etc LctrGzmn 02:47, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well i wnated to have static and passive possessive but i mustn't have made it obvious so I'll go back and change that and thanks for making that clear :D. I have accented consonants instead of digraphs, not because i dislike digraphs rather because I thought accented consonants were cool, e.g for my letter for /p/ in my script, i have the same letter with two dots underneath to represent q, and i have an accented /s/ for a double and longer /s/ sound. I think thats what you mean anyway. I really have to get around to putting up a better image file of my alphabet. vii 2:04 PM, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Kti

 * Apart from that the page is a bit "messy", probably because the thick borders of the tables don't really look professional, this language has a well documented grammar. The only thing that I see as a real "question mark" is the use of the letter ash ("æ"). It doesn't really seem to fit the language. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 11:39, August 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * I admit, I have some tables that don't fit in, but they are from the time when I didn't know how to make those sleek class=wikitable ones. Also, the "ash" letter/"æ" represents a vowel. I admit it doesn't really look fitting, but it is functional.

Bengedian

 * Pro: As much as I wanted to vote neutral -- or even con -- for this language, the pros outweighed the cons. It's moderately well constructed and organized quite well. One thing that bugged me, however, was the lack of anything... well, interesting. Bengedian does a good job of doing what other languages do, except it's missing that something that screams Bengedian, rather than a jumble of grammar and vocabulary. I reckon this language isn't too far from completion, however, I do advise whoever created it to not make it so... generic, for lack of a better word. Cheers. LctrGzmn 04:06, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Zxoaame

 * The language has potential, I say that, but has some structuring and organisational problems that make finding stuff hard. I'd vote neutralRostov-na-don 20:22, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

Vuén Nabóştï

 * Con: As much as I loathe voting negative, it seems that I have little to no choice. The language is, shortly said, a mess. It has huge amounts of potential, but you clearly lack user-friendliness, and compared to some other languages, your language is an organisational nightmare. Fear not, thy follower of the way of Conlang, not all hope is lost: I think that you are not nearly done with the language, as you have yet to explain the é, ó, ï sounds, work around the mess, and other problems, so if you want, I might help you with those, the same offer applies to ZxoaameRostov-na-don 20:22, August 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * Con: Romanization should not contain such unneeded things as umlaut just because it is at the end of a word, if its in your own writting it can be good or whatnot but not in romanization The Emperor Zelos 10:04, August 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Con: it's like vietnamese, take a look at a few seconds and you become overaccented. --O u WTBsjrief-mich 11:41, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Count:
Kti: 0

Ancient Qâêr: -1

Bengedian: 1

Zxoaame: 0

Vuén Nabóştï: -3