Most hated conlang

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3496
Joined: 14 May 2016 18:47
Location: The North

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Frislander » 18 Aug 2016 21:34

Lao Kou wrote:
CrazyEttin wrote:It wasn’t a good attempt even for its time.
By what standard do you say this?
Well given English then adjectival agreement and case make no sense... but then Zamenhof probably didn't know English well enough nor realise just how many speakers it would have to really take it into account: you can't blame him for not considering a language he wasn't all that familiar with.

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5665
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Lao Kou » 18 Aug 2016 21:55

So English is the standard by which Esperanto should be evaluated?
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3496
Joined: 14 May 2016 18:47
Location: The North

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Frislander » 18 Aug 2016 22:10

Lao Kou wrote:So English is the standard by which Esperanto should be evaluated?
No, but if you're going to be serious about auxlanging (and I really wouldn't recommend it), then at least taking the most widely spoken language and global lingua franca into account is no bad thing. This is something Zamenhof doesn't seem to have done.

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5665
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Lao Kou » 18 Aug 2016 22:28

Frislander wrote:No, but if you're going to be serious about auxlanging (and I really wouldn't recommend it), then at least taking the most widely spoken language and global lingua franca into account is no bad thing. This is something Zamenhof doesn't seem to have done.
Well then, use English and cut out the middleman -- the status quo (and not my fight). That still doesn't address why Esperanto may be lacking even by late nineteenth century standards.
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3496
Joined: 14 May 2016 18:47
Location: The North

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Frislander » 18 Aug 2016 22:46

Lao Kou wrote:
Frislander wrote:No, but if you're going to be serious about auxlanging (and I really wouldn't recommend it), then at least taking the most widely spoken language and global lingua franca into account is no bad thing. This is something Zamenhof doesn't seem to have done.
Well then, use English and cut out the middleman -- the status quo (and not my fight). That still doesn't address why Esperanto may be lacking even by late nineteenth century standards.
I agree, given the time period the chances of it being much better are slim indeed.

User avatar
CrazyEttin
greek
greek
Posts: 578
Joined: 28 Feb 2011 19:43

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by CrazyEttin » 18 Aug 2016 23:58

Lao Kou wrote:
CrazyEttin wrote:It wasn’t a good attempt even for its time.
By what standard do you say this?
It uses both word order and case marking for marking arguments, for starters, and the original grammar isn’t even complete even though it claims to be, in many parts it assumes the reader knows a SAE language and thinks the way SAE langs do stuff is the "right" way. Someone wrote an excellent text, Ranto, describing in detail how it fails in every way: some of it can be excused by its time and place, i guess, like eurocentrism, but not all of it.

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3496
Joined: 14 May 2016 18:47
Location: The North

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Frislander » 19 Aug 2016 01:02

CrazyEttin wrote:
Lao Kou wrote:
CrazyEttin wrote:It wasn’t a good attempt even for its time.
By what standard do you say this?
It uses both word order and case marking for marking arguments, for starters, and the original grammar isn’t even complete even though it claims to be, in many parts it assumes the reader knows a SAE language and thinks the way SAE langs do stuff is the "right" way. Someone wrote an excellent text, Ranto, describing in detail how it fails in every way: some of it can be excused by its time and place, i guess, like eurocentrism, but not all of it.
The guy's name is Justin B. Rye and you can find his web pages at jbr.me.uk.

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5665
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Lao Kou » 19 Aug 2016 01:46

CrazyEttin wrote:It uses both word order and case marking for marking arguments, for starters,
So?
and the original grammar isn’t even complete even though it claims to be, in many parts it assumes the reader knows a SAE language and thinks the way SAE langs do stuff is the "right" way.
This may be true, but I doubt holes in the grammar defaulting to SAE were about assumptions of it being "right" rather than it being just default assumed to be default. Unless someone channels Zamenhof, we can't know.
Someone wrote an excellent text, Ranto, describing in detail how it fails in every way:
Guess I'll have to read said article to see how it fails in every way.
Edit: Looked at your link; hardly seems a balanced critique rather than a Limbaughesque rant aimed at those already primed to diss Esperanto.
some of it can be excused by its time and place, i guess, like eurocentrism, but not all of it.
If Esperanto asks to be excused of anything, I'd rather hear it from those who actually speak it fluently or 2G speakers, who have the power and inclination to move it forward. While Zamenhof may have been defined by time and place, he also had the advantage of not being inundated by the web and naysayers who would tell him why his idea or parts thereof sucked each and every step of the way. What IAL since has been proposed that doesn't have a retenue of critics describing in detail how it fails in every way (hence, never getting off the ground)?
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

User avatar
Ear of the Sphinx
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1969
Joined: 23 Aug 2010 01:41
Location: Nose of the Sun

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Ear of the Sphinx » 19 Aug 2016 16:22

Adarain wrote:Those are quite good points that I've never really considered. I guess it's fair to say that Esperanto was a good attempt for the time it was created, but (imo) has no right to still be considered one in modern times, the only reason it's popular is because it already is - if someone made it now, it would definitely not catch on.
But Esperanto isn't hated because of it being a bad auxlang (English is even worse as an auxlang, but it is commonly used; Elefen is a much better one, still nobody knows of it).

Esperanto is hated because it's so popular it distorts the general public's view of constructed languages. It is like Ubuntu among Linux systems or like E. L. James among BDSM writers — if you tell an average person you're creating a conlang they are going to associate it with the conlang they're most likely to have heard of, even though yours has a completely different goal in mind, is based on a completely different philosophy and was created using objectively superior tools and knowledge. Cue questions like “How many people speak your language?”, “Is it easier to learn than English/Chinese/Esperanto?”, “What does the alphabet look like?”
Thrice the brinded cat hath mew'd.

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5665
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Lao Kou » 19 Aug 2016 16:51

Ear of the Sphinx wrote:Esperanto is hated because it's so popular it distorts the general public's view of constructed languages.
I seriously doubt the general public knows enough about Esperanto to care about it, let alone hate it.
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

User avatar
Isfendil
greek
greek
Posts: 708
Joined: 19 Feb 2016 03:47

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Isfendil » 19 Aug 2016 17:40

I am very confused. One of the languages mentioned here is hated supposedly because it lacks a copula, but many languages almost completely lack a copula. Old Babylonian just has a word for "exist", there is no verb for "to be", and most copula phrases are timeless and verbless.
Does E-Prime mean something different?

Also the only language I really hated was my own, Edyssian, and only in hindsight after I rewrote it following my acquisition of glorious linguistimacal knowledge (before I knew linguistics, I knew about language families. Edyssian was indo european so I thought it would be easy: I just produced mangled cognates in my head. It was not at all unworkable though, much of the Old language was easily repurposed and actually kinda conformed with sound changes. Funny how we can do that subconciously). I'm fairly happy with it now, although morphologically I don't really know where to go with it (I keep reading about conlangs with 48+ pages of morphology and I honestly don't understand how you could need so much even though you probably do and I am missing some fundamental gubbins).

User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4586
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by DesEsseintes » 19 Aug 2016 18:34

I really hate this thread more than I've ever hated a conlang. I guess I can only blame myself for reading it. :roll:

User avatar
k1234567890y
runic
runic
Posts: 3080
Joined: 04 Jan 2014 04:47
Contact:

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by k1234567890y » 19 Aug 2016 18:40

DesEsseintes wrote:I really hate this thread more than I've ever hated a conlang. I guess I can only blame myself for reading it. :roll:
(hug) maybe you just have a very open mind (:
...

User avatar
KaiTheHomoSapien
greek
greek
Posts: 670
Joined: 15 Feb 2016 06:10
Location: Northern California

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by KaiTheHomoSapien » 19 Aug 2016 19:05

Lao Kou wrote:
Ear of the Sphinx wrote:Esperanto is hated because it's so popular it distorts the general public's view of constructed languages.
I seriously doubt the general public knows enough about Esperanto to care about it, let alone hate it.
[+1]

I heard about Quenya and Sindarin before I ever heard of Esperanto. And ditto for Klingon [:P]

User avatar
k1234567890y
runic
runic
Posts: 3080
Joined: 04 Jan 2014 04:47
Contact:

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by k1234567890y » 19 Aug 2016 19:16

KaiTheHomoSapien wrote:
Lao Kou wrote:
Ear of the Sphinx wrote:Esperanto is hated because it's so popular it distorts the general public's view of constructed languages.
I seriously doubt the general public knows enough about Esperanto to care about it, let alone hate it.
[+1]

I heard about Quenya and Sindarin before I ever heard of Esperanto. And ditto for Klingon [:P]
lol

I think I started to create conlangs before I even had a clear idea about what conlangs are...

Speaking of the public view of conlangs and Esperanto, an encyclopedia of an electronic dictionary I had when I was in high school states that Conlangs as something similar to Esperanto, if my memory is not wrong...=_="
...

User avatar
Ear of the Sphinx
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1969
Joined: 23 Aug 2010 01:41
Location: Nose of the Sun

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Ear of the Sphinx » 19 Aug 2016 20:00

Lao Kou wrote:
Ear of the Sphinx wrote:Esperanto is hated because it's so popular it distorts the general public's view of constructed languages.
I seriously doubt the general public knows enough about Esperanto to care about it, let alone hate it.
I'm not saying general public cares about or hates Esperanto*.

I'm saying Esperanto is one of the few languages the general public is likely to know and it's the one vastly different from most of the languages the conlanging community cares about.

*) or Quenya, or Sindarin, or Klingon, or Slovio, for that matter…
I think I started to create conlangs before I even had a clear idea about what conlangs are...
Yep, and I started to create conlangs before I even had a clear idea about my own L1's grammar.
Thrice the brinded cat hath mew'd.

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3496
Joined: 14 May 2016 18:47
Location: The North

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Frislander » 19 Aug 2016 20:03

DesEsseintes wrote:I really hate this thread more than I've ever hated a conlang. I guess I can only blame myself for reading it. :roll:
I don't blame you.

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5665
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Lao Kou » 19 Aug 2016 20:37

DesEsseintes wrote:I really hate this thread more than I've ever hated a conlang. I guess I can only blame myself for reading it. :roll:
Close your eyes and think of England. [;)]
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

User avatar
Isfendil
greek
greek
Posts: 708
Joined: 19 Feb 2016 03:47

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by Isfendil » 19 Aug 2016 21:02

Ear of the Sphinx wrote:
I think I started to create conlangs before I even had a clear idea about what conlangs are...
Yep, and I started to create conlangs before I even had a clear idea about my own L1's grammar.
Hey it's the same here! Although for non IE all I could do was make words (without grammar) and use english's dead letters in the same unusual ways that I had seen them used before.

User avatar
LinguoFranco
greek
greek
Posts: 461
Joined: 20 Jul 2016 17:49
Location: U.S.

Re: Most hated conlang

Post by LinguoFranco » 19 Aug 2016 22:39

Chagla wrote:Just had a look into Solresol. The concept looks brilliant, but don't think anyone would be able to communicate effectively in a language that is even less complicated as Toki Pona, Hawai'ian or Japanese as there would be way too many homophones.

Then tones woulḑ have to be introduced... *facepalm*

My vote goes more towards Klingon. I mean, what was the guy smoking? He just made his language unspeakable.

Oh yes, +1 for Eragon Ancient Speak for being too much Copypasta on Old Norse. Bad boy, bad boy!
Klingon was designed to be alien as its fictional native speakers are, well... Aliens. It's not meant to be a human language, though if I were president I would establish mandatory Klingon classes in public schools.

I agree that Solresol is brilliant, but I feel like the words would all sound too similar. It would just get confusing.

I personally thought about creating a conlang using the abbreviations of the elements on the periodic table.

Post Reply