the ethics of language tampering

Posted by Gustavo S. Pereira on 1:14 7/28/01

In reply to: the ethics of language tampering and the sociolinguistics of conlangery posted by Panu Petteri Höglund on 4:15 7/26/01

I personally agree with Mark, and think there isn't yet a group of Verduriophones (did you like it?? hehe) in Oikumene to be seriously affected by any change. Besides, we must remember that there is a community of speakers of Verdurian who would be more affected by any change to the language: the people of Ereláe!!! It is primarily a "fantasy" language, and not a specific lingua franca, like Esperanto, for example. So, for example, if some changes are made, that wouldn't be Mark's work, but Verdurian grammarians' :) !!!


Gustavo Pereira

P.S.: By the way, I have a question: Is Dhekhnami spoken by both ktuvoki and men? When we refer to the "Dhekhnami" or to the "Munkhâshi" we refer to the men or to the ktuvoki or to both?

Mark responds:

The ktuvoki learned human languages in order to make slaves... I'm afraid I don't know much about their own languages. Munkhâshi is an Eynleyni language, specifically of Demóshimor (The Eynleyni are the people who lived in Dhekhnam before the ktuvoki emerged from their swamps.) Dhekhnami is its modern descendant.

Few people outside the empire have ever seen a ktuvok! Of course this only adds to their mystique... Attafei and Ervëa had to possess rare courage to venture into their dens.

To make a reply, or see replies, see the index page.