Forum:Conlang Featuring

Discuss which one to feature on the front page here

Not sure how things work? Go here Honoured Languages

 Ancient Qâêr   won this months! Check Archive if you want to see discussions and votings of it

 of voting for May 

Discussion
I have to say that Con voting still looks weird to me, esp. Con voting by nominees. Here's how you game the system: pick a language that has no chance of winning, and Con everything but that one and your own. Which is equal to Pro voting for yourself for all practical purposes. Adagio burner 17:24, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hence it is forbidden The Emperor Zelos 17:31, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * ? I vote Con on all but two, mine and someone else's (losing). Or do you mean I would have to pick two losers? I don't think it's going to be difficult either :( Adagio burner 19:20, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * You can vote con on more than one, just not all but your own, atleast 1 else must be non-coned The Emperor Zelos 19:50, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Zelos, you don't seem to have read the above. Let me repeat: I vote con on all but my own plus some language that is bound to lose. The result is equivalent to self-vote. Adagio burner 20:13, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * What is the problem here? You voted on all but yours and one more, then you did fine The Emperor Zelos 20:39, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * That is equivalent to self-voting. Then, why ban self-vote? I hate (and won't be) playing the con game, it feels dirty, trying to find flaw in every one's creation. Adagio burner 20:46, April 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Its not about pro voting yourself, this "competition" if you like runs every month, an considering the relative small number of decent active conlangs we have on this site, it means that pretty much everyone who has a decent conlang will get featured eventually. The idea of con and pro voting is to give constructive criticism to a language(con) as well as giving feedback about the good things or things that have been done very well (pro). We are not here to "bad out" or insult other peoples work, and if anyone does that I am sure Zelos, as the moderator, will crack down on them as he sees fit and in a fair way. The idea here is not to see "Con" as saying your language is shit, rather aas a way of saying "You still have a little more work to do in this area/there are some errors you need to fix" and the idea of "pro" is to congradulate and praise people who have done or achieved something of a good linguistic value in their conlang. We are here as a community to help each other and for all of us to get better. This voting should be seen as a way of rewarding someone who has done well and helping others are who arent quite there yet tol be featured, not about paying out other people or their work just because you want this banner. And if you really don't feel comfortable "con"-ing other peoples work then just dont do it. Problem solved. vii 01:07, May 4th, 2010 (UTC)

Is anyone gonna start voting? —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 04:29, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Do it :P The Emperor Zelos 07:20, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm waiting for a non-participator to vote *cough cough*. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 20:20, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Lol hate to complain for the eightieth time since joining the wiki, but someone pro or con Quai'op, I feel left out. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 22:32, May 19, 2010 (UTC)

Nominations:
NB: For all those obsessing about or complaing or talking 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 your grammar is essentially in a state of completeness - Conlang:Translations

 of nominating for May 

''' Nominations are over! '''

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 weeks have passed
 * 3) State the purpose of the conlang in the description

Nominating

 * It isnt shallow, it is in accordance witht he rules and perfectly fine The Emperor Zelos 13:11, April 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * Please translate the feature banners text or the nomination willl be nullified The Emperor Zelos 07:05, April 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Isaac Bonewits 20:52, April 30, 2010 (UTC)Isaac Bonewits
 * Issac, when funishing your message add ~ to sign it, and good The Emperor Zelos 17:51, April 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * What is used for it's if not used as a spoken language? vii 00:37, May 5th, 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you trying to make a political statement? —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 22:43, May 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't say it wasn't spoken, I meant it isn't supposed to be a complete auxiliary language, just a language for business. Its word base is pretty limited; you'd have a hard time discussing anything else. You can interpret it as you wish Kenny ;) Razlem 23:20, May 4, 2010 (UTC)

Panglossa | Talk 15:49, May 12, 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 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 don't count, but are welcome to post comments and such.
 * 6) Try voting what you think looks best in accordance to these criterias.
 * 7) Realistic, it looks as if it could be real
 * 8) Goal, it reaches 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.
 * 9) Completeness, how close is it to completion?
 * 10) Bots (ZeBot and Fakultinj) cannot vote at all.

Voting

 * Chathan
 * Con: It attempts being a germanic language but lacks gender which all germanic languages do have (english being exception) without proper justification, and being dutch/german closest it would need to have 3 genders like both of them do, agreement and all. a few minor here and there I think it can have lots of potensial for its purpose The Emperor Zelos 09:53, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Con. I give you Kudos for your work on this language, however not only does it lack gender which all Germanic languages have, but I belive, being a speaker of 3 Germanic languages, that, like most other Germanic conlangs, it lacks the individualism nd uniques to be called a standalone language, or deserving to be featured. Not only is it easily understandle to people who speak natural Germanic languages (what is the point of creating a conlang that is hardly different to a family of living natlangs?) but it also lacks features typical to Germanic languages which all the germanic languages you seem to have taken inspiration from, possess. Therefore on these grounds I give you a con. No offence. vii 09:41, 14 May, 2010
 * Pro: Aside from its lack of genders, I believe that Chathan beautifully executes its purpose of being a Germanic language. It has a focus on the western branch, but also has its share of North Germanic words. I say Pro. N00b1shm4n 23:15, May 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * vii, concerning its similarity with a natlang family, it's called a zonal constructed language: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zonal_constructed_language Isaac Bonewits 18:47, May 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Con: This is a dialect of Dutch and German, not a conlang.--Koppa Dasao frelangi kazelangin na 13:53, May 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * If this is a dialect of both Dutch and German, which doesn't really make sense, than Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian are definitely all the same language. Isaac Bonewits 20:35, May 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * In some regards they are.--Koppa Dasao frelangi kazelangin na 20:40, May 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree, I can speak German, and can understand almost everything in Dutch. I also have a lot of danish, swedish, and norwegian friends who can all talk to each other in their own languages, which technically, because they can do this, doesnt really make danish and swedish, or german and dutch, completely different languages due to them being mutually understandable. It would be like saying London English is a different language to American or Australian English, which we all know is rubbish. I think you have done some very good work here, but it isn't a proper conlang. vii 15:01, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to vote pro or con, for what I will say will count as both. However, I don't necessarily see it as a dialect. I can understand about 80% Portuguese and about 60% Italian, and I don't even speak it. Does that make Portuguese and Italian dialects of Spanish? No, I think this is a moderate representation of another language family. However, I do feel it doesn't bring enough to the table to be its own language. Tweak things up a bit, you know, give it something that will make it characteristic of itself. LctrGzmn 17:36, May 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Pro The language does reminds one of the germanic family, being a speaker myself of this I find myself understanding much by default - this in itself does not disqualify it in my eyes as a proper conlang, but only adds merit to it as a possible member of the germanic natlang family. Not having gender is something I find quite refreshing seeing as my own native language - Swedish has compounded the three original genders into two and I am noticing amongst the younger portion of the population a slight tendency to fail at distinguishing the two remanining genders. Coupled with immigration diluting this knowledge even more it is most certainly a path I see possible - that of the elimination of grammatical gender. It is a natural development I believe caused by the influence of the english language. I do not see why it should have to have three genders just because it claims relationship with dutch and german - behold the Frisian language, relative of English which has maintained its gender system. As a response to vii's complaint about how it does not have a "point" if it's too similar to a natlang family - the point is in the eyes of the maker, if the maker wishes to have it so, so be it. Personally, I find that objection null. Tbh. Back to the subject at hand, if one considers swedish, norwegian and danish the same language one could claim the same of the whole germanic family claiming intelligibleness the sole criterion, one could "jump" between adjacent dialects going from village to village... Just my two cents. :) ~ Billy J.B(talk) 01:28, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Adwan
 * Pro: so far to what i have seen (I will check more later) i think it got alot of nice unusual features and more, doesnt seem KSLing. Only drawback is usage of characters most cant type on their keyboard The Emperor Zelos 13:11, May 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Con: Adwan is not easily learned due to the fact that it is sparse on cognates with natlangs. I also dislike how certain characters aren't easily typed with a keyboard. I do like the fact that Adwan can be written in Cyrillic. N00b1shm4n 23:15, May 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, the sparse on cognates happens a lot between languages that aren't related. In Spanish, "pes" means "fish", while in Czech, it means "dog". Even with languages that are some-what related, such as "mensa" in latin, which means "table", means "feminine idiot" in Spanish. Just sayin'... LctrGzmn 19:57, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Didn't the guy resign? —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 01:20, May 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * No I didn't. Idk why my entry was erased.. And to the characters issue: Yes well, what else do you expect from a phonemic language? LctrGzmn 06:03, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Pro: one of the most sound and developed languages on this site. Adagio burner 07:35, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sukika
 * Pro: There is lots of innovation here, the langage sounds, looks and feels as the languages it's been influenced by. Adagio burner 07:35, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Con: The length of the roots and morphemes make the language somewhat inefficient and extremely difficult to learn. Plus on the grammar though. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 14:52, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Con The language seems messy and unreadable with all those repeats of letters. --Koppa Dasao frelangi kazelangin na 13:53, May 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * Pro: I have to fully agree with adagio burner, whilst perusing it most certainly reminded me of the Eskimo-Aleut languages and certain features of the Finno-Permic family. It appears to succeed in doing that which it sets out to do. I do agree that it might seem slightly messy to a person that speaks some sort of *IE but if you take a look at the aleut-eskimo/finnish languages it seems quite fine. Compare "Nunatsiavummiutut" with "ifkoddumbaddur"... Also, I do quite enjoy the heavy use of g, w, p and d. Reminds me of a good ol' celtic languages (c.f." ..ewydd ...fwriedid...gael,.. ddyrchafu...")

Count:

 * Chathan: -1
 * Adwan: +1
 * Sukika: +-0