[conlang_learners] criteria for IE

[Olivier Simon]

Sell vesper ! 
 
We already discussed this topic and Jim (and secundarily I) has given criteria to define an IE language. But, if the word IE was uttered about the choice of the language to be taught, I think it was a misunderstanding; I suppose it was only intended that auxlangs with a majority of Western Romance vocabulary should be excluded for the purpose of this group (It would be useless to build this group in order to teach a conlang similar to Interlingua or Esperanto...). Even here I mean Western Romance as refering to natlangs actually existing in the real world (otherwise, we should exclude Brithenig and Kerno... !!!)
To come back to your question, a majority of IE vocabulary does not make an IE language (as we say in France: "l'habit ne fait pas le moine"); many Dravidian languages have a majority of Sanskrit loanwords and this does not turn them into IE languages; it is even possible that Finish, Hungarian and Basque include a majority of IE roots!
I know the inventor of a conlang which may even include a little more IE roots than Sambahsa; nevertheless, he's angered by the fact that I and an other indoeurpeanist refuse to qualify his conlang as IE because of its grammar. On the contrary, Sambahsa does have an IE grammar. 
 
At this moment, I am precisely looking if the IEs had a specific word for "deity", for a Sambahsa translation !
 
Olivier
http://sambahsa.pbworks.com/ 

--- On Fri, 6/19/09, Dayle Hill <dwhmusic32 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:


From: Dayle Hill <dwhmusic32 at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: [conlang_learners] criteria for IE
To: conlang_learners at conlang.org
Date: Friday, June 19, 2009, 12:29 PM







Hypothetically, if my conlang was chosen and it 'evolved' from the combined learning efforts of others..I'd actually be quite excited about that...It's like a dialect, therefore another string the conlang's bow.
 
Can anyone clear this up for me. Talking about IE languages...but in this context, conlangs of IE influence and style. Is it assumed that a conlang can only be termed IE if it shares a majority of IE lexicon? Especially in the Germanic lingos...for example
 




English
Scots
West Frisian
Dutch
Low Saxon
German
Gothic
Icelandic
Faroese
Swedish
Danish
Norwegian (Nynorsk)

Apple
Aiple
Apel
Appel
Appel
Apfel
Aplus
Epli
Epl(i)
Äpple
Æble
Eple
 
You see, I term my conlang as being full of IE traits, but lexically speaking, probably less than 10% of words are derived from any Germanic language, or in fact Slavic, Romance or otherwise, therefore I'm not really sure if it would actually be classed as an IE conlang.
Grammatically, it is similar to IE, with prepositions, adverbs, nom/acc case for pronouns etc...but then there are many syntactical rules that are, in my opinion, unique.
Any ideas? (I ask this because of the unbiast opinions against IE conlangs for this project)
Cheers


"I'm strange to those who are normal, and normal to those who are strange; quite frankly-I prefer the latter"!

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
conlang_learners mailing list
conlang_learners at conlang.org
http://lists.conlang.org/listinfo.cgi/conlang_learners-conlang.org



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.conlang.org/pipermail/conlang_learners-conlang.org/attachments/20090619/3e58b786/attachment-0003.htm>