In article <1190536074.228073.210380@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
James Landau <savegraduation@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> There is a serious gap in the academic coverage of conlangs.
There is also not much academic coverage of quilting, scrapbooking, and
journalling. Conlanging is a creative _hobby._ Why suck the life out of
it?
> Medicine, physics, mathematics,
> malacology all have their respected journals that are accepted as
> reliable sources. For Verdurian, Ceqli or Toki Pona? Nothing.
Wikipedia is the worst thing to happen to information since the burning
of the Library of Alexandria, or the invention of television. Who gives
a rat's ass what the editors of Wikipedia view as reliable sources?
> It could be said to be a peer review of constructed
> languages.
Creation of such a journal is one of the goals of the Language Creation
Society, led by a Berkeley weirdo named Sai Emrys (which is an anagram
of "airy mess"). Google 'em.
> And one more thing: The conlangs being reviewed must be of real
> interest to somebody other than its creator.
Ah, here we come to the real motivation, the desire to proclaim that
some conlangs are worthy and others are crap.
I would prefer a more inclusive journal and one in which people could
openly express their opinions instead of having to hide their
editorials in the Klan-like white robes of academic re****tage.
|
