X-languages: Difference between revisions
WeepingElf (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
WeepingElf (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
The X-languages are quite different from each other and do not form a unified family of any sort. They surely aren't cognate in the historical linguistic sense as, for example, [[Low Elvish]] and [[Macaronesian]] are cognate. Nevertheless, there are a few recurrent features, such as [[self-segregating morphology]] and only one single open word class lumping together all the content words (nouns, verbs, adjectives etc.). None of the X-languages has a conculture attached, and none is intended to be [[naturalist artlang|naturalist]]. | The X-languages are quite different from each other and do not form a unified family of any sort. They surely aren't cognate in the historical linguistic sense as, for example, [[Low Elvish]] and [[Macaronesian]] are cognate. Nevertheless, there are a few recurrent features, such as [[self-segregating morphology]] and only one single open word class lumping together all the content words (nouns, verbs, adjectives etc.). None of the X-languages has a conculture attached, and none is intended to be [[naturalist artlang|naturalist]]. | ||
What I am ''not'' going to do is to propose ''any'' of the X-languages as an [[auxlang]] or anything like that. They are ''experimental'' and way too bizarre to be actually used (for example, I doubt that any human can parse an [[X-2]] sentence which makes ample use of the language's stack-manipulation tricks in real time); and I am doing this (as all of my conlangs) just for ''fun ''. | |||
==List of X-languages== | ==List of X-languages== | ||
Revision as of 02:31, 24 February 2006
The X-languages are experimental languages by Jörg Rhiemeier. They are called this way because they are designated by the letter "X" followed by a number. The "X" stands for "eXperimental language".
The X-languages are quite different from each other and do not form a unified family of any sort. They surely aren't cognate in the historical linguistic sense as, for example, Low Elvish and Macaronesian are cognate. Nevertheless, there are a few recurrent features, such as self-segregating morphology and only one single open word class lumping together all the content words (nouns, verbs, adjectives etc.). None of the X-languages has a conculture attached, and none is intended to be naturalist.
What I am not going to do is to propose any of the X-languages as an auxlang or anything like that. They are experimental and way too bizarre to be actually used (for example, I doubt that any human can parse an X-2 sentence which makes ample use of the language's stack-manipulation tricks in real time); and I am doing this (as all of my conlangs) just for fun .
