1) HGL's F.B. writings : On Constructed Languages · 2) Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Con-Langs · 3) HGL's F.B. writings : Noster Franzeis - üne Lange konstreute per mei! · 4) Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Are constructed languages (Na'vi, etc) really languages? Why or why not? (quora)
- M. E.
- So... someone on Youtube just told me:
"One person cannot create a nuanced grammar. Language is created by a group of people communicating, although, technically, no language has been created for about a hundred thousand years.
You might be a genius, have a great imagination, a passion for your hobbies, etc, but you can't create a language."
- H. G. L.
- Or you might be a linguist who knows exactly what makes the grammars you use nuanced.
For instance, having studied Latin, I know one ought to have a difference between factual and unreal mood of conditional clause-pairs (antecedent with consequent). And might have more (Latin also has potential mood, for sth which could be realised in the future).
More than that - if he was taking an oblique poke against Tolkien and therefore Tolkien fans, actually Tolkien did not need a nuanced grammar. The texts his Quenya and Sindarin corpus encompasses is mainly straightforward narrative, wishes, commands, perhaps prophecy, nouns and noun phrases without verbs - in other words, a nuanced grammar was beyond the scope of his purpose.
- M. E.
- "Ok, well, as a scientist who specializes in human language, I am telling you that linguists are in agreement that individuals cannot make languages. "Constructed languages" is wishful thinking. It's a hobby, but please respect the tens of thousands of linguists who dedicate their lives to the science of language."
- H. G. L.
- Con langers usually do.
However, I very much doubt that he has taken a poll representing really all tens of thousands of linguists all over the world.
He has probably taken a poll on his faculty, which probably has a professor who is anti-Tolkien biassed and therefore anti-conlangs biassed.