Forum:Conlang Featuring

Discuss which language to feature on the front page here.

Not sure how things work? Go here Honoured Languages

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

''' of voting for June. '''

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 June. '''

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

 * Pacardian I nominate my Pacardian, my Romance conlang. It draws from languages such as Catalan, French, Galician, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish. The phonology and orthography are easy to learn, as is the simplified grammar. Masculine and feminine genders are present, though only in nouns and their articles. The lexicon contains a good amount of everyday vocabulary, mostly originating from cognates shared amongst Neolatin tongues. In exchange for some more originality, the language was not necessarily created to unite Romance speakers, but may be used as such. The use of j and w to represent the semivowels /j/ and /w/ respectively is an intended departure from typical Romance. In addition, like Romance languages in general, Pacardian is arguably beautiful in both writing and speech. --Isaac Bonewits 17:01, June 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Quai'op. I'll renominate just for the heck of it. The language is easy because every word has equal or double meanings, and there's no redundance. The main concern when I was making the language was information flow. There's little vocab resemblance, but it's still easy enough to learn. The grammar is unique and fun, and the phonology is somewhat easy. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 01:37, June 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * Zazt. A conlang I found at random, I find it very interesting. It is very aesthetically pleasing, has a nice combination of uniqueness and elements from various languages. It may not be as complete as other conlangs, however I find it complete enough for a feature. ANT1INSECT 23:55, June 17, 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.

Voting

 * Pacardian
 * Con: After careful analasys, I have concluded that the Pacardian page is two-thirds just plain old dictionary with only word meanings. Use Contionary :) So for Pacardian I vote Con, sorry :( Your language is the least completed, while Quai'op is the most completed.Rostov-na-don 20:43, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Con: I agree with Rostov, it simply isn't complete enough. There are only conjuguation tables and vocabulary, pretty much nothing about how to build phrases, which is a very important part. ANT1INSECT 23:38, June 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * Quai'op
 * Pro: The most intriguing thing was evidentiality (After careful analasys I have concluded that the soup is hot xD ) You have quite a few ways to express something, y'know? So, for Quai'op, I vote Pro :) I only have complaints about the staggering amount of things, but it's exotic, and has a balance, so it's plausible.Rostov-na-don 20:43, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Pro: I find that this conlang is very unique, and very nicely thought up. Visually, it is great. Even if it lacks vocabulary, I think it has something going for it, and it derserves to be featured. ANT1INSECT 23:38, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Even so, he can use the Contionary :) Rostov-na-don 11:27, June 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Pro: The language is somewhat strange, the page needs some more work, but there is something in it that makes me like it. Also, seems to be the most complete of the candidate languages. Panglossa | Talk 14:26, June 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * Zazt
 * I'll leave Zazt neutral, as it is in the middle Rostov-na-don 12:11, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Pro: For the same reason that I nominated Zazt, I'll vote it "pro". By the way, the creator of Zazt is NOT me (it's Oraton), therefore even though I nominated it it's not a self vote. ANT1INSECT 23:38, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * True, true Rostov-na-don 11:27, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Count:

 * Pacardian: -2
 * Quai'op: 3
 * Zazt: 1