Building a Language

[Dave Rapp]

We are building a language.

In the interest of simplicity, we have eleminated capitalization. Sentences now begin with a period, question mark, or exclaimation mark, just like how they end.

We have a letter for both the short and long vowel sounds. We will be using capital vowels to represent the long vowel sounds, until we find replacement letters. Now we no longer require silent E's, OA's, OO's, ect to show that a vowel is long or short.

Y is also no longer a vowel. I or E are used whenever it used to be one. However Y is still used as a consonant, and makes the same sound as before.

We've eleminated C and replaced it with S or K as needed.

G never makes the J sound. Now only J does.

Silent letters are no longer used, anywhere.

We are also considering making a letter for CH- and SH- sounds, but require feedback.

This sentence is written in the old language, and giant in the playground rocks!

!this sentense is ritten in thE nEw languAj, and jIant in thE playgroUnd roks!

Our language is superior to yours.

Discuss.

[Brickwall]

We are building a language.

*snip*

Y is also no longer a vowel. I or E are used whenever it used to be one. However Y is still used as a consonant, and makes the same sound as before.

*snip*

This sentence is written in the old language, and giant in the playground rocks!

!this sentense is ritten in thE nEw languAj, and jIant in thE playgroUnd roks!

Obviously you failed to realize that in the word "playground", "y" is used as a vowel (in case you doubt that, try substituting 'i' for 'y' there. See how it's the same?). It's called a dipthong. Learn these things before you bastardize English.

There are other mistakes, but that's the most glaring one.

[purple gelatinous cube o' Doom]

Seems to me the basic premise of your language was just to make it more phonetic than English. Quite frankly, it seems like a jumble with the caps in the middle of words and what not, and very distracting.

[The Orange Zergling]

It should be spelled 'sentens'.

Here I am, only having known your language for ten seconds, and already correcting you on it. :smalltongue:

[Brickwall]

It should be spelled 'sentens'.

Here I am, only having known your language for ten seconds, and already correcting you on it. :smalltongue:

Ha! I found a mistake after only knowing the language for 5 seconds! Your grammar-fu is weak!

[de-trick]

looks like some kind of L33t thing

[Nibleswick]

So, Basically you just want to make something like Esperanto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto) again? Perhaps you just want to make English phonetic? Well then, the easy way to do that is to use diacritical marks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diacritic)

Wow, I've never used Wiki-Fu on anyone before.

[[red][/red]]

We are building a language.

In the interest of simplicity, we have eleminated capitalization. Sentences now begin with a period, question mark, or exclaimation mark, just like how they end.

We have a letter for both the short and long vowel sounds. We will be using capital vowels to represent the long vowel sounds, until we find replacement letters. Now we no longer require silent E's, OA's, OO's, ect to show that a vowel is long or short.

Y is also no longer a vowel. I or E are used whenever it used to be one. However Y is still used as a consonant, and makes the same sound as before.

We've eleminated C and replaced it with S or K as needed.

G never makes the J sound. Now only J does.

Silent letters are no longer used, anywhere.

We are also considering making a letter for CH- and SH- sounds, but require feedback.

This sentence is written in the old language, and giant in the playground rocks!

!this sentense is ritten in thE nEw languAj, and jIant in thE playgroUnd roks!

Our language is superior to yours.

Discuss.

Namaste.

I felt compelled to register because my amateur linguist's sensibilities are offended by this post. If I seem harsh, it is because inventing and learning new languages is something that I do all the time, and...well, it seems like you didn't bother to do your research. I'm probably overreacting, and I apologize ahead of time.

What you have created is not a language, it is a very incomplete (and informal) English phonetics system. A language is infinitely more complex, and is composed of many parts, including grammar, phonology, written language, and their subdivisions. Building one is a labor-intensive process that requires the knowledge of multiple real languages. Think about the differences of pig latin and Sanskrit in comparison to English.

Also, your system has many gaping holes that would easily have been filled in if you had looked up the IPA on wikipedia. For example: "th", "ch", and "jh" are all seperate consonants ("th" is actually 2 different ones, "th"ing, and "dh"us, they differ in voicing) that are used in a number of forms in english. "y" has its own sound as a vowel (as do "r" and "l" in some languages), like in the word crystal.

The main problem is that you've only used english (a very irregular language, filled with loan words) as your base. It really helps to know at least something about other languages. I would recommend starting with Latin, because the words are similar to English ones in many ways, but it introduces a complex system of grammar that helps in understanding how grammar works on a worldwide scale. It also highlights similarities between various languages that make learning others easier.

[[red][/red]]

So, Basically you just want to make something like Esperanto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto) again? Perhaps you just want to make English phonetic? Well then, the easy way to do that is to use diacritical marks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diacritic)

Wow, I've never used Wiki-Fu on anyone before.

I think he wants the second one (Esperanto is a full interlanguage, or whatever the proper term is), in which the best thing would be the IPA or some equivalent.

[bluewind95]

I remember a forwarded email that used that same premise... except I read it in Spanish. I don't think this guy is really building his own language. Just posting a (rather silly) message he must've found on the internet.

[Nibleswick]

[red] Welcome to the Playground:smallbiggrin:

[Haruki-kun]

Well, you gotta see the difference:

Are you trying to create a Language or a Cypher?

As I see it, you are trying to create a Cypher, a code-language (but English, nevertheless).

If you want to actually create a Language, you need new words, conjugations, grammar rules, etc.

[Dwarkanath]

I suggest looking at some constructed language resources:

The Language Construction Kit (http://www.zompist.com/kit.html)
ConLang Wiki (http://talideon.com/concultures/wiki/)
LangMaker Wiki (http://www.langmaker.com/db/Main_Page)

Of course, a Google search returns oodles of hits (http://www.google.com/search?q=conlang+resources&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS218US219)

-- Dave

[The Neoclassic]

[/red];3423846']What you have created is not a language, it is a very incomplete (and informal) English phonetics system. A language is infinitely more complex, and is composed of many parts, including grammar, phonology, written language, and their subdivisions. Building one is a labor-intensive process that requires the knowledge of multiple real languages.

Most certainly agreed. This "language" which you "invented" simply looks like an excuse to not use real spelling, which doesn't surprise me since you repeatedly misspelled "eliminated," without even any basis in your alleged language. I use quotation marks on language and invented here not to be snide, but because I find myself doubting whether either is a truly appropriate term. Try "purposefully misspelled dialect of English" which you "copied from an email." If you actually did take time to make this, I apologize on that last note, but still frankly think this is an ugly twist of English. It adds nothing, and displays no knowledge of linguistics or textual aesthetics.

Real languages are superior to the above purposefully misspelled dialect. Now go read "Politics and the English Language" by George Orwell.

[Quincunx]

That's a bit harsh, an entire book for the first offense? One of the appendices to 1984, whichever one dealt with Newspeak, will also give education with much less reading--and Newspeak is also a mutilation of English.

[The Neoclassic]

That's a bit harsh, an entire book for the first offense? One of the appendices to 1984, whichever one dealt with Newspeak, will also give education with much less reading--and Newspeak is also a mutilation of English.

Actually, "Politics and the English Language" is just an article- not a whole book. I just reread for a class yesterday. Now that you point it out, however, the section of Newspeak from 1984 would be more appropriate here. Thanks for the good suggestion. :smallsmile:

[Dave Rapp]

Yeesh, you folks are harsh. I guess that's what I get for posting something stupid on a forum full of smart people. But hey, what do I care? I'll take my incomprehensible sense of humor over your advanced linguistic skills any day of the week. Books and research? It's a silly forum thing. Chill the heck out.

Oh, and as for misspelling emilinated... that should have been the dead givaway that A. this was not just copied from some email and B. I'm not remotely serious about this language of mine.

[Ravyn]

Nah, you got off easy. On the first message board I hung out on, they would've ripped you apart and left your skull on a sticky as a warning to people who aren't even making the effort to make English-clones.... but that's because it was a board for the primary purpose of being a hangout for people who create languages for purposes ranging from hobby to scholarly pursuit, and they took it very, very seriously.

(And really, they did that to everyone who didn't make an honest effort, or seemed to denigrate the fine art of conlanging. You should've seen them ranting about Paolini--forget the plot, they were all over the fact that the word orders didn't change any, half the vocab was phonetically modified borrows, and.... but I digress.)

I expect the harshness of at least a few of the responses was because conlangers, or creative linguists or the like don't tend to pop up much outside of places made specifically for our kind, and when they appear it's far too easy to get hopes up that there's someone we can discuss subjunctives and dialectal variations and our favorite SOVs with.... and then we discover it's, well, not. Bit of a disappointment, and often results in overreaction.

So.... why did you post this, anyway?

[Semidi]

I think Mark Twain wrote an Essay one time detailing how the English language could be easily fixed by doing things like what you suggested. As the article went on he inserted these 'corrections' until it was utterly incomprehensible. You might find it amusing if you can find it, I can't at the moment. Possibly because I'm not sure if Mr. Twain really wrote it.

[†Seer†]

I know fleunt English. Je sais un peu de francais. But as to creating a whole new language, yo no se...

What I wonder though (@OP), who is "We"?