Are Artistic Languages Considered Real?

Started by Mako, March 22, 2010, 08:52:49 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mako

Title says it all. I'm trying to debate this with someone.

wm.annis

I'm not sure I understand the question.  They exist.  People use them.  What alternate measure of reality is your disputant using?

Mako

That they can't be used on resumes and such. You sure like following me around :P

Tsäroltxe te Eyrutì Tantse'itan



omängum fra'uti

What defines an artistic language?  Is Esperanto artistic?  What about Loglan/Lojban?  The first was created to be a politically neutral language to foster international peace, the second was created as part of research into Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis.

The former you aren't likely to use on a resume, and the latter you are even less likely to find someone who speaks.  (I did actually witness a couple people who didn't know each other directly at a chance encounter speaking Lojban once though.)  I suppose the political expression of Esperanto could be considered a form of art.  And creating a language is certainly, as the verb suggests, a creative endeavor.  But both were created for real world purposes.

But...  Taking that to the next step, creativity expands "real" languages too.  Don't have a word for something?  You come up with a creative way to say it.  Even the grammar and syntax of a language can evolve, potentially, by means of creative expression.  And at the root, aren't all languages constructed by people?  Sure, "real" languages don't come from someone sitting around making up words (At least...  I can't really picture a bunch of cave men sitting around holding up a rock and agreeing on a grunt, then holding up a stick and agreeing on a different grunt...) but at some point, constructed languages can evolve by the community as well.

So if, say, Loglan was created for practical purposes, and Klingon is likely spoken by more people than Loglan, does that make Klingon more of a "real" language than Loglan?
Ftxey lu nga tokx ftxey lu nga tirea? Lu oe tìkeftxo.
Listen to my Na'vi Lessons podcast!

wm.annis

Quote from: Sänumeyu on March 22, 2010, 08:59:41 PMThat they can't be used on resumes and such.

Ahh, yeah.  Unless you're applying for a job like Paul Frommer got with James Cameron, you're not going to put an invented language on a resume.  The only one I could imagine using that way is Esperanto, and then only if you had a natural language or two to include in the list.

But whether or not you can put something on a resume is a rather odd definition of reality, in my opinion.  I wouldn't put "I play banjo" on my resume, either, but I assure you that the banjo is real (as the neighbor dogs can also attest to).

Mako

Ok, thanks. That actually hurts me, not helps me though :P it's alright though.

Nìwotxkrr Tìyawn

The day that there is a Na'vi University is the day that Na'vi goes on my resume.  :D
Naruto Shippuden Episode 166: Confession
                                    Watch it, Love it, Live it

Kìte'eyä Aungia

Ever hear the aphorism, "a language is a dialect with an army and navy"? I think it applies equally well to constructed languages, or at least it will after the first time a country adopts a constructed language.

Txur’Itan

Quote from: Kìte'eyä Aungia on March 23, 2010, 02:01:55 AM
Ever hear the aphorism, "a language is a dialect with an army and navy"? I think it applies equally well to constructed languages, or at least it will after the first time a country adopts a constructed language.

Albeit humerous, and a reasonably interesting thing to say in an unreasonable debate, there are plenty of real languages that no longer have those attributes.

Quote from: wm.annis on March 22, 2010, 08:57:25 PM
I'm not sure I understand the question.  They exist.  People use them.  What alternate measure of reality is your disputant using?

Along the lines of what Mr. Annis has said here, I suggest you ask whomever says this to use a dictionary and look up the word real. 

Before this person leaves to go do this search, should he/she choose, tell him/her that his/her understanding of what is real and what is not real, is currently fictional.
私は太った男だ。


Kìte'eyä Aungia

Quote from: Txur'Itan on March 25, 2010, 08:14:17 PM
Quote from: Kìte'eyä Aungia on March 23, 2010, 02:01:55 AM
Ever hear the aphorism, "a language is a dialect with an army and navy"? I think it applies equally well to constructed languages, or at least it will after the first time a country adopts a constructed language.

Albeit humerous, and a reasonably interesting thing to say in an unreasonable debate, there are plenty of real languages that no longer have those attributes.

The point of the aphorism is that there is no objective difference between a dialect and a "real" language, which is usually so called because it's backed by a state or because of political conditions. I think the same could be said of constructed languages. The differences between a constructed language and a "real" language are superficial.