In article <1194518278.775295.15400@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Sai
Emrys <saizai@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> (Incidentally regarding reviews, I believe that any conlanging
> reviews, to be successful, must first ask the question 'what did the
> author of this language intend for it, and how am I to measure their
> success at their stated goals?'.
So a conlanger can foil your pre-conceived notions merely by publi****ng
a language design without any stated goals?
> I have no illusion that publi****ng such a journal, no matter its
> quality, will change the academic (or general public's) opinion /
> awareness of conlangs and conlanging overnight.
Conlanging is a particularly individualistic hobby. (I guess this why
some of the people so interested in "organizing" conlangers are not
working on conlangs of their own; they do not have the type of strongly
independent personality needed to be a ccnlanger.) It is not clear what
benefit a conlanger, seeking to express himself or indulge his whims
linguistically, gains from conlangery being well-known or obscure,
appreciated or mocked by academia.
"The community has no bribe that will tempt a man who is minding _his_
_own_ business" - Thoreau
> That is a goal that
> will take years to achieve. But each step does make a difference,
You write like a politician.
Organization is a euphemism for hierarchy.
|
